UC-NRLF                     

B 

M     D57    STT 

THE    LITERARY  CRITICISM 
OF  PIERRE  BAYLE 


By 

HORATIO  E.   SMITH 


A    DISSERTATION 

submitted  to  the  board  of  university  studies  of  the 
Johns  Hopkins  University  in  conformity  with  the 
requirements  for  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Philosophy 


ALBANY.   N.   Y. 
THE  BRANDOW  PRINTING  CO. 
1912 


Maim 


TO  MY  MOTHER 


263334 


PREFACE 
SCOPE  OF  THE  PRESENT  STUDY 

No  examination,  in  any  sense  complete,  has  ever  been  made 
of  the  literary  criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle.  Histories  of  literature 
give  him  only  passing  mention  and  make  hardly  any  comment 
on  the  significance  of  his  opinions  about  letters.  The  study  of 
Betz,  Pierre  Bayle  und  die  'Nouvelles  dc  la  Republique  des 
Lettres,'  takes  up  the  question  at  more  length  and  gives  an 
excellent  general  estimate  of  Bayle  as  a  literary  critic.  But 
Betz'  treatment  is  almost  exclusively  restricted  to  a  single  one 
of  the  numerous  products  of  Bayle's  pen,  and  since  he  discusses 
the  several  different  aspects  of  the  Nouvelles,  his  analysis  of 
Bayle's  literary  criteria  is  by  no  means  detailed.  Although 
Lenient,  in  his  Etude  snr  Bayle,  makes  some  just  and  accurate 
comments  in  the  section  which  he  devotes  to  the  Sccpticisme 
Litteraire  of  the  Rotterdam  free-thinker,  these,  too,  are  brief 
and  incomplete.  The  book  on  Pierre  Bayle  by  Cazes  contains 
a  series  of  selections  from  Bayle's  works,  and  one  group  of 
these  has  been  chosen  to  illustrate  the  distinctive  qualities  of 
his  literary  criticism.  But  Cazes,  in  his  own  discussion,  pays 
no  attention  to  these  qualities.  In  the  various  essays  that  have 
been  written  on  Bayle,  the  remarks  concerning  his  literary  criti- 
cism are  decidedly  meagre. 

It  is  the  purpose  of  the  present  study  to  investigate  this 
particular  feature  of  his  activity,  to  establish  with  whatever 
documentary  evidence  can  be  collected  the  exact  character  of 
Bayle's  attitude  toward  literature.  He  does  not  give  any  formal 
treatment  of  literary  subjects,  and  none  of  his  works  may  be 
termed,  in  any  technical  sense,  literary.  Yet,  scattered  through 
the  nine  folio  volumes  there  are  manifold  remarks  that  have 
a  more  or  less  direct  bearing  on  books  and  authors.  Bayle  was 
not  primarily  a  man  of  letters,  but  since  his  interest  in  this  field 
was  considerable,  and  since  he  occupies  an  important  place  in 
the  history  of  French  thought,  and  plays  a  significant  role  in 


6  Preface 

the  intellectual  development  of  Europe,  it  seems  worth  while 
to  try  to  determine  accurately  the  nature  and  value  of  his 
expressed  opinions  on  literature.  To  do  so  is  the  aim  of  this 
study.  ^ 


^  Three  less  important  chapters  of  the  dissertation  as  submitted  to 
the  Johns  Hopkins  University  are  not  included  in  the  work  as  here 
presented.  The  omitted  sections  are :  an  introductory  chapter  entitled : 
Life  of  Bayle;  his  general  characteristics  as  thinker  and  tnan,  andl  two 
chapters  of  Part  I,  entitled:  Panegyrics,  Libels,  Letters,  etc.,  and  Indi- 
vidual Authors.  Of  these  last  two,  part  of  the  first  has  been  incor- 
porated in  the  chapter  on  History. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER 

Preface:    Scope  of  the  present  study 

Part  I :    Bayle's  Criticism  as  applied  to : 

Books  and  Authors 

Fiction    . 

Poetry     . 

Drama     . 

Oratory  . 

History  . 

Scholarship 

Style 

Ancients  and  Moderns 
Part  II:    The  Precepts  which  Bayle  advocates  in  Criticism. 

The  Function  of  the  Critic     ......  X 

Part  III:    Conclusion. 

Summary  of  Bayle's  Opinions ;  his   rank  and  character- 
istics  as    a   critic 

Influence    of    Bayle 
Bibliography 
Vita 


I 

II 

III 

IV 

V 

VI 

VII 

VIII 

IX 


PAGE 

5 

9 

i6 

22 
28 
34 

39 
63 
78 


95 


XI 

113 

XII 

126 

^33 

136 

BOOKS  AND  AUTHORS^ 

A  few  remarks  that  Bayle  advances  in  regard  to  the  charac- 
teristics of  authors,  as  to  what  they  are  and  what  they  should 
be,  suggest  the  general  attitude  which  he  takes  towards  the 
profession  of  authorship.  It  therefore  seems  worth  while  to 
mention  these  here  before  proceeding  to  an  outline  of  his 
opinions  concerning  particular  genres,  concerning  the  various 
expressions  of  the  waiter's  activity. 

Values  in  the  Republic  of  Letters  are  not  judged  by  money 
standards.  Writers  should  be  impelled  by  higher  motives  than 
a  mere  desire  for  gain.  Consequently  the  mercenary  spirit  of 
many  authors  reflects  much  discredit  upon  their  kind. 

C'est  ce  qui  fait  un  grand  tort  aux  muses,  c'est  ce  qui  les  prive  de  la 
gloire  dont  elles  devraient  jouir  d'inspirer  a  leurs  sectateurs  un  veritable 
desinteressement,  et  un  genereux  mepris  des  richesses  et  des  recompenses 
publiques.  lis  ressemblent  aux  autres  hommes,  dit-on,  ils  ne  sont  pas 
moins  sujets  que  les  autres  a  I'ambition  et  a  I'avarice,  les  deux  maladies 
populaires  du  coeur  humain.'' 

These  grasping  waiters  have  in  view  not  solely  the  money ; 
they  imagine  that  the  rewards  they  may  reap  w'ill  not  only  be 
desirable  as  such,  but  will  add  to  their  reputation  and  stamp 
them  as  great  authors.  Rut  this  is  nonsense.  A  good  book  is 
good,  even  though  the  author  may  have  died  of  starvation,  and 
a  bad  book  is  not  redeemed  by  the  fact  that  its  composer  was  a 
marquis  or  a  millionaire.  A  writer  who,  scorning  wealth  and 
devoting  all  his  energy  to  the  composition  of  good  books,  dies 
poor,  has  earned  a  title  of  nobility  in  the  Republic  of  Letters.' 
Bayle  advocates  moderate  compensation  for  men  of  letters : 
liberal  pay  inclines  them  to  idleness,  for  they  feel  secure  in  their 
opulence ;  scanty  pay  inclines  them  to  hasten  their  productions 

^  For  the  abbreviations  used  in  the  foot-notes  of  this  and  the  following 
chapters  cf.  infra,  p.  133,  notes   i  and  2. 
'D.  VII.  477,  Hainan,  M. 
'  Ibid.     Bayle  goes  on  to  commend  the  disinterestedness  of  Descartes. 


I  o  TJie  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

and  to  give  them  to  the  pubHc  in  a  form  far  from  perfect — the 
less  each  piece  brings  in,  the  more  of  these  they  must  write.* 

Carelessness  and  haste  in  writing  are  to  be  avoided ;  an  author 
should  resist  the  temptation  to  see  himself  continually  in  print. 
He  should  not  begin  publishing  too  early  in  life,  and  he  should 
compose  a  pas  comptes.^  The  number  of  excellent  writers  would 
be  larger  if  those  who  have  acquired  a  certain  reputation  by 
their  productions  should  content  themselves  with  publishing  only 
one  work  in  every  four  years.  But  they  do  not  do  this ;  they  go 
ahead  rapidly  and  depend  too  much  on  the  fame  already 
acquired.*'  A  similar  abuse  occurs  in  the  case  of  authors  who 
seek  to  publish  what  they  have  written  in  their  early  days.     It 


*  D.  XII.  576,  Ronsard,  K.  Though  it  may  be  better  to  have  these 
mediocre  works  than  none  at  all,  the  public  may  be  more  benefited  when 
the  author  is  too  poor  than  when  he  is  too  rich.     Cf.  Gigas,  pp.  59-63. 

For  passing  remarks  against  the  mercenary  spirit  of  authors  cf :  D.  V. 
395,  Dassouci,  F;  D.  VI.  129,  Elizabeth,  O;  D.  VIII.  564,  Kirstenius,  B; 
D.  XIII.  305,  Simonide  (2),  N;  cf.  also  O.  D.  I.  610,  xii;  D.  V.  432, 
Decius,  D;  D.  I.  iii,  Accarisi,  A:  Bayle  deplores  the  mercenary  spirit 
of   many  professors. 

When  authors  are  needy  and  have  to  support  large  families  Bayle  is 
inclined  to  excuse  their  efforts  to  secure  patrons.  D.  XII.  461,  Rangouze, 
A;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  476,  ix. 

For  a  vigorous  objection  to  the  introduction  of  money  standards  in  the 
Republic  of  Letters  cf .  D.  I.  386-7,  Alciat,  G :  "  Quand  vous  pretendez 
que,  si  Ton  vous  donne  une  plus  grosse  pension  pour  ce  que  vous  direz 
en  chaire,  c'est  une  preuve  qu'on  vous  estime  un  plus  grand  predicateur 
ou  un  plus  savant  professeur,  ne  jugez-vous  pas  de  votre  metier  comma 
Ton  juge  de  celui  d'un  cordonnier  ou  d'un  chapelier?  Cela  est  fort  propre 
a  decrier  les  sciences  et  a  faire  mepriser  ceux  qui  les  professent;  .  .  . 
C'est  assijrement  mettre  son  erudition  a  I'encan,  et  faire  savoir  au  public 
qu'on  ne  se  livrera  qu'au  plus  ofFrant  et  dernier  encherisseur." 

It  is  a  shame  to  decry  such  sciences  as  physics  and  mathematics  because 
they  do  not  enrich  their  devotees.  O.  D.  I.  697,  viii ;  cf.  also  D.  II.  25, 
Anaxagoras,  A :  "  Voila  le  gout  d'une  infinite  de  gens :  ils  condamnent 
toutes  les  occupations  qui  ne  servent  pas  a  faire  fortune."  Apropos  of 
philosophers.     Note  the  reference  here  to  D.  XV.  236,  Projct  de  ce  Diet. 

"  D.  X.  337,  Marsus,  B.     Cf.  the  ref.  here  to  D.  XV.  102,  Zuerius,  B.     . 

•D.  VI.  523,  Forbes  (3),  B.  Cf.  O.  D.  II.  161.  Avis  au  Lectcur  for  the 
Nouvellcs  Lcttres  .  .  .  de  I'Histoire  du  Calvinisme.  Bayle,  referring 
to  his  own  work,  says  a  writer  is  apt  to  spend  all  his  energies  on  his  first 
book  and  if  he  tries  to  write  again  on  the  same  subject  he  makes  many 
repetitions  of  what  has  already  been  said,  and  perhaps  relies  too  much  on 
the  reputation  that  the  first  work  may  have  made  for  him. 


Books  and  Authors  ii 

is  judicious  indeed  for  them  to  wait  until  they  have  ac(|uired 
a  solid  reputation,  and  when  they  have  done  so  they  may  venture 
with  a  certain  degree  of  safety  to  bring  forth  their  youthful 
efforts."  But  they  must  not  build  too  much  on  their  reputation 
and  too  little  on  the  merits  of  such  compositions.* 

Bayle   deplores   the   vanity   of   men   of   letters    who   cry   out 
against  the  ingratitude  of  the  public. 

Ce  defaut  est  presque  une  maladie  epidemique  dans  la  republique  des 
lettres :  il  n'y  a  guere  d'auteurs  qui  ne  se  plaignent  de  I'ingratitude  de 
leur  siecle.  Ceux  qu'on  appelle  beaux-esprits  se  signalent  par  dessus 
les  autres  dans  cette  espece  de  plainte.  II  leur  semble  que  ce  ne  serait 
pas  se  donner  des  airs,  que  de  convenir  que  la  fortune  les  a  regardes 
d'un  bon  ceil.  On  dirait  qu'ils  craignent  que  s'ils  paraissaient  contens 
de  ses  faveurs,  le  public  ne  prit  cela  pour  un  aveu  qu'ils  sont  sans 
merite ;  car  il  y  a  un  lieu  commun  fort  ancien  qui  nous  apprend  qu'elle 
est  aveugle,  et  qu'elle  choisit  tres-mal  les  objets  de  son  amour.  . 
Ainsi  tous  ces  lieux  communs  que  nos  beaux-esprits,  et  tant  d'autres 
ecrivains,  poussent  contre  la  Fortune,  sont  dans  le  vrai  un  pompeux 
eloge  des  grandes  et  des  belles  qualites  dont  ils  s'imaginent  etre  remplis. 
II  y  a  done  la-dedans  un  peu  trop  de  vanite." 


^  Bayle  states  that  in  general  the  excellence  of  a  writer's  production 
varies  directly  according  to  his  experience :  D.  XII.  174,  Plotin,  E.  But 
he  is  inclined  to  admit  exceptions  to  this,  and  elsewhere  cites  La  Bruyere 
— though  indeed  in  an  argument  de  circonstance — as  an  example  of  an 
author  whose  coup  d'essai  was  a  masterpiece :  O.  D.  II.  643 ;  cf.  D.  V. 
353,  Daille,  H. 

'  D.  XIV.  130-1,  Thomaeus,  D.  Apropos  of  a  savant. 

There  are  various  references  to  the  superabundance  of  books  in  Bayle's 
own  day.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  388,  iii :  "jamais  le  maladie  de  faire  des  Livres 
n'a  ete  plus  generale  que  dans  ce  siecle  ...  si  Ton  pent  croire  que 
la  demangeaison  de  faire  des  Livres  est  une  fievre  continue  avec  des 
redoublemens.  Ton  peut  croire  aussi  que  la  generation  presente  s'est 
rencontree  dans  le  retour  de  I'acces."      Cf.  O.  D.  I.  383,  i ;  O.  D.  I.  715. 

Cf.  also  O.  D.  I.  745  i :  Bayle  refers  to  the  multitude  of  books  which 
are  being  published.  One  reason  for  this  torrent  de  livres  is  that  when 
a  man  gets  hold  of  some  small  idea  he  feels  the  need  of  writing  a  book 
around  it  so  that  he  may  present  it  to  the  public. 

Cf.  also  O.  D.  IV.  529,  iv :  "  J'ai  om  dire  a  des  gens  qui  en  avoient 
senti  quelque  chose,  qu'il  n'y  avoit  rien  de  plus  chargeant  que  I'envie  de 
se  faire  imprimer,  et  que  des  le  moment  qu'on  a  les  matieres  toutes 
pretes,  on  se  fait  un  pretexte  de  batir,  si  on  ne  le  trouve  pas  tout  fait." 

•  D.  XI.  333-4,  Pays,  H.  Bayle  refers  to  Balzac  as  an  example  of  this 
type  of  author.  Balzac  had  plenty  of  the  comforts  of  life,  yet  he  was 
always  complaining  of  fortune.     Certainly  he  was  not  over-modest. 


1 2  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

Often  enough  it  is  the  authors  who  are  guilty  of  ingratitude, 
not  the  pubHc.  Bayle  makes  one  or  two  other  remarks  concern- 
ing the  high  opinion  which  authors  have  of  their  own  produc- 
tions." 

The  writing  of  books  is  not  a  very  practical  business,  and 
authors  are  not  apt  to  be  men  who  would  succeed  in  the  affairs 
of  every-day  life.  It  often  happens  that  a  man  who  is  good 
at  writing  books  is  good  at  nothing  else ;  outside  of  his  study 
he  is  a  dunce.^^  And  certainly  a  bel-esprit,  who  devotes  his 
energies  to  the  polishing  of  a  sonnet,  is  not  likely  to  prove 
a  splendid  financier,  however  he  may  prosper  in  Love.^* 

So  much  then  for  the  characteristics  of  men  of  Letters,  and 
especially  their  faults.  Evidently  Bayle  sets  a  high  standard 
for  the  citizens  of  this  Republic  of  Letters.  Their  calling  is 
a  dignified  one,  and  they  are  not  to  debase  it  by  seeking  mere 
material  rewards,  nor  by  composing  hurriedly  and  carelessly, 
nor  by  giving  way  to  their  vanity.  They  are  outside  of  the 
ordinary  world  of  affairs,  and,  in  a  measure,  above  it.^^ 


^^  Cf.  D.  V.  555,  Dolet,  C :  Bayle  remarks  on  the  indignation  of  a 
savant  when  another  writer  takes  up  the  lance  to  defend  some  particular 
cause  which  he,  the  first  man,  believes  he  has  already  successfully  dis- 
puted. Cf.  D.  VII.  568,  Heloise,  R;  cf.  also  O.  D.  I.  477,  i:  "On  fait 
ordinairement  un  miserable  personnage,  lorsqu'on  parle  soi-meme  de  ses 
Ecrits."  Bayle  is  referring  to  his  own  Reponse  .  .  .  a  I'Avis  sur 
ce  qu'il  a  dit  en  faveur  du  P.  Malebranche. 

"  O.  D.  I.  L.  140,  xciv :  "  Quand  vous  aurez  plus  d'experience,  et  que 
vous  aurez  connu  personnellement  plus  de  personnes  celebres  par  leurs 
ecrits,  vous  verrez  que  ce  n'est  pas  si  grande  chose  que  de  composer  un 
bon  livre,  et  qu'il  n'y  a  souvent  rien  de  si  sot  ni  de  plus  incapable  d'une 
affaire  hors  du  cabinet  qu'un  bon  Auteur."  Cf.  D.  III.  219,  Beaucaire, 
G;  D.  III.  497,  Boccalin,  B;  D.  IV.  436,  Carbon.  A ;  O.  D.  I.  284,  iv; 
O.   D.  I.  L.   146:    "Autre  chose  est  d'ecrire,  autre  chose  est  d'agir,"  etc. 

"  D.  XI.  334,  Pays.  H. 

"For  other  remarks  on  authors,  their  ways  and  characteristics,  cf: 

On  Plagiarists:  O.  D.  I.  307  iv:  "  des  gens  dont  la  race  ne  perit  point 
parmi  Ics  Auteurs.  quoi  qu'on  les  expose  souvent  a  Tinfamic  publique." 
D.  V.  561,  Donaldson,  B;  D.  VI.  67,  Duaren,  H;  D.  VI.  165.  Ephore, 
C ;  Gigas,  p.  68. 

On  the  contradictions  of  Authors:  O.  D.  II.  166-184,  Lcttres  II,  III. 
In  the  Nouvclles  Lettres  Critiques  sur  rHistoire  du  Calvinismc.  The 
emphasis  is  wholly  on  the  contradictions  which  come  up  in  controversial 
and  especially  religious-controversial  writings.  Bayle  tabulates  the  causes 
of  such  contradictions.     He   cites   Cicero  as  an   example,   in  maintaining 


Books  and  Authors  13 

There  is  some  discussion  of  the  question  as  to  uiiether  an 
author  is  revealed  in  his  work.  Bayle  would  perhaps  grant  that 
the  general  characteristics  of  authors  as  a  class  are  evident 
enough  in  their  writings.  But  at  any  rate  he  is  not  inclined 
to  think  that  the  intimate  personality  of  the  individual  may  be 
discovered.  In  the  first  place  an  author  is  apt  not  to  be  frank 
enough  to  make  himself  known  to  the  public  as  he  really  is. 
Although  it  is  claimed  that  a  writer  paints  himself  in  his  books, 
it  is  certain  that  he  does  not  give  a  faithful  portrait.  He  dis- 
guises himself  as  he  may  see  fit,  and  whoever  would  take  the 
mask  for  the  real  man  would  be  much  deceived.  Even  the 
Letters  of  an  author  are  not  trustworthy ;  they  may  come 
nearer  to  the  truth  than  other  productions, 

mais  apres  tout,  on  n'ecrit  pas  aux  gens  tout  ce  que  Ton  pense ;  on 
auroit  trop  de  honte  de  se  montrer  a  eux  tel  qu'on  est,  et  trop  de  peur 
de  se  faire  des  ennemis  par  son  ingenuite." 

It  is  also  true  that  what  an  author  writes  may  be  merely  a 
jeu  d'csprit,  and  for  this  reason  not  reflect  in  any  way  the  real 
qualities  of  the  composer.  It  is  quite  possible  for  a  man  of 
great  moral  excellence  to  write  verses  which  abound  in  obsceni- 
ties. He  may  introduce  salctcs  not  because  they  have  any 
attraction  for  him  as  such,  but  because  they  offer  a  good  oppor- 


that  one  of  the  causes  is  flattery;  he  points  out  how  Cicero  praises  Cccsar 
in  one  case  and  blames  him  in  another. 

Of  the  frequent  obscurity  of  the  ancestors  and  descendants  of  the 
heroes  of  the  Republic  of  Letters:    D.  VII.  69.  Gentilis  (3),  B. 

Cf.  also  the  reference  to  "  cette  humeur  bizarre  et  capricieuse  que  Ton 
voit  assez  souvent  dans  les  artistes  les  plus  consommes.''  Apropos  of 
Apelles:    D.  II.  165,  Apelles.  D.  Cf.  D.  II.  183,  Apollodore  (2),  C. 

"  O.  D.  I.  23.  Apropos  of  the  Letters  of  Gui  Patin,  which.  Bayle  says, 
are  an  exception  to  the  rule  and  which  do  reveal  the  man  clearly. 

Cf.  D.  VIII.  221,  Hortensius  (2),  H:  Bayle  comments  on  the  unreliabil- 
ity of  remarks  on  other  men  which  authors  make  in  their  published 
works,  an  unreliability  due  to  the  author's  unwillingness  to  disclose  his 
real  sentiments.  In  this  case,  however,  he  is  inclined  to  admit  that 
authors  speak  frankly  in  letters  to  their  friends.  Cf.  the  ref.  given  here 
to  D.  VII.  283,  Grotius  (2),  M. 

Cf.  O.  D.  III.  6.  Pref.  de  la  le.  Ed.  des  Pensees  Divcrses,  etc :  "  Cet 
air  libre  que  Ton  se  donne  quand  on  ecrit  a  un  Ami,  mais  non  pas  quand 
on  veut  se  faire  imprimer.  .  .  .  Ceux  qui  ecrivent  dans  la  vue  de 
pubher  leurs  pensees  s'accommodent  au  terns,  et  trahissent  en  mille 
rencontres  le  jugement  qu'ils  forment  des  choses,"  etc. 


14  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

tunity  for  him  to  give  play  to  his  ingenuity  and  earn  the 
applause  of  those  who  find  a  particular  charm,  a  particular  scl, 
in  such  subjects. ^^  Similarly  in  fiction  the  character  of  a  novel 
hardly  throws  any  light  on  the  character  of  the  individual  who 
composes  it;  here  again  we  have  an  author  exercising  his  in- 
telligence and  imagination,  without  putting  his  personality  into 
the  composition.  Alany  of  the  best  ronians  are  being  written 
by  women,  but  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  they  are  telling 
their  own  love  stories,  or  that  they  approve  the  extremely 
amorous  tendencies  of  their  heroines.  Indeed  it  is  certain  that 
the  only  object  is  to  display  their  ability,  their  art  in  the  depict- 
ing of  character  and  passion.^*'  Finally  it  is  true  that  a  writer 
whose  own  morals  are  exceedingly  flimsy  may  express  in  his 
books  the  noblest  sentiments  of  virtue  and  decency.^"  This 
is  another  case  where  it  would  be  nonsense  to  judge  from  an 
author's  compositions  what  kind  of  a  man  he  really  is.^* 

"  D.  XIV.  291,  Vayer,  D.  Bayle  adds  several  other  remarks  on  this 
question  of  whether  obscenities  in  a  poem  indicate  the  moral  perversity 
of  the  poet.  There  are  some  poets,  like  Catullus,  Ovid  and  Martial,  in 
whose  case  the  obscenities  come  from  the  natural  inclination  of  the  writers 
to  such  wickedness — there  is  no  excuse  for  these.  But  Bayle's  general 
attitude  is  the  one  noted  in  the  text. 

Cf.  D.  XIV.  425,  Virgile,  A:  It  is  quite  possible  for  poets,  editors  of 
poetical  texts,  etc.  to  acquire  a  viewpoint  from  which  they  may  regard 
such  dangerous  objects  with  impunity,  since  their  attitude  is  merely 
impersonal  and  professional;  cf.  D.  XIII.  81,  Sanchez,  C.  Cf.  D.  XIV. 
292,  Vayer,  D :  Some  writers  are  all  the  more  careful  in  avoiding 
obscenities,  lest  any  slip  should  justify  the  reports  which  are  current  as 
to  their  bad  moral  character.  Cf.  D.  X.  319,  Marot,  H :  There  is  no 
reason  why  a  poet  who  was  a  rascal  should  not  translate  well  the  Psalms 
of  David,  just  as  there  is  no  reason  why  the  good  statue  of  a  wicked 
sculptor  should  have  no  place  in  a  church. 

"D.   XIV.  424,  Virgile,   A. 

"  D.  XIV.  290,  Vayer,  D.  Two  cases  are  possible :  a  rascal  may 
write  virtuously,  or  a  man  of  excellent  moral  worth  may  write  books 
that  are  far  from  edifying.  Bayle  cites  Sallust  and  Clodius,  on  the 
authority  of  Lc  pcre  Lemoinc;  Discours  dc  I'Histoirc,  and  Cicero:  Orat. 
de  Haruspicum  Responsis,  respectively,  as  examples  of  men  of  utccurs 
dereglecs  whose  writings  were  serious  and  admirable.  Cf.  O.  D.  III.  87, 
cxxxv ;   Gigas,   42. 

"  On  this  question  as  to  whether  an  individual  is  reflected  in  his  book 
cf.  O.  D.  I.  259:  "  C'est  une  grande  illusion  que  dc  juger  dc  I'ame  d'un 
Homme  par  ses  Kcrits." — apropos  of  a  man  who  wrote  a  vigorous  defense 
of  polygamy  but  had  taken  unto  himself  not  even  a  single  wife. 


Books  and  Authors  15 

In  a  word  authorship  does  not  ever  mean  to  Bayle  an  emi- 
nently personal  thing;  it  is  almost  always  an  objective  afifair 
in  which  the  brains  and  imagination  of  the  man  are  concerned, 
but  hardly  his  real  self.  Bayle's  comments  on  the  various  kinds 
of  literature  will  bring  out  the  fact  that  this  attitude  is  a 
constant  one,  that  he  rarely  looks  at  a  book  as  an  expression 
of  a  writer's  whole  individuality,  but  as  an  indication  of  his 
caliber  as  impersonal  artist  or  thinker. 


II 

FICTION 

Occasional  references  to  works  of  fiction  indicate  that  Bayle 
takes  a  certain  interest  in  this  kind  of  literature.  He  mentions 
the  writings  of  Mile,  de  Scudery/  La  Princesse  de  Clcvcs,- 
Telemaque,^  Francion,*  the  Roman  de  la  Rose,^  Daphnis  et 
Chloe,^  and  various  other  productions.'  Novels  awaken  his 
curiosity  and  often  they  are  mentioned  as  diverting.®  From  time 
to  time  his  interest  prompts  a  critical  remark,  but  there  are  few 
cases  where  Bayle  devotes  himself  to  the  task  of  analysing  care- 
fully the  merits  of  a  novel,  and  apparently  he  hardly  thinks  such 
an  efit'ort  worth  while ;  with  the  exception  of  one  or  two  short 
reviews  dealing  with  particular  remans^  the  observations  which 
he  makes  on  fiction  are  introduced  apropos  of  some  other  matter. 

When  Bayle  does  indulge  in  criticism,  the  general  character 
of  his  remarks  shows  what  features  attract  him.  He  does  not 
ask  whether  a  novel  has  any  value  as  an  appeal  to  the  imagina- 


^D.  IV.  183,  Brutus;  D.  XI.  329,  Pays;  O.  D.  I.  L.  15,  75-6.  125,  Ixxx. 
In  the  first  and  fourth  of  these  references  the  Clelic  is  attributed  to  M. 
de  Scudery. 

^  O.  D.  I.  L.  92,  98,  Ixiv,  loi,  Ixvii. 

'D.  XII.  75,  Pygmalion. 

*0.  D.  I.  632. 

°D.  VII.  563,  Heloise,  F. 

°  D.   IX.  352,  Longus. 

'  O.  D.  I.  L.  49:  "On  m'a  dit  qu'il  y  a  un  Roman  nouveau  intitule 
'la  Citerie,'  ou  '  I'Asterie '  .  .  .  Je  croi  qu'il  est  de  la  fagon  de 
Mademoiselle  de  la  Roche,  qui  a  compose  I'Arioviste  autre  Roman  ;"  81  : 
"II  y  a  une  maniere  de  Roman  qu'on  appelle  I'Histoire  des  Sevarambes;" 
125,  Ixxx :  "  M.  de  Vaumoriere  vient  de  donner  au  public  un  Roman  en 
quatre  petits  volumes  intitule  'Adelaide  de  Champagne,'  et  Mademoiselle 
Bernard,  jcunc  fille  de  Rouen,  agee  de  17  ans  et  de  la  Religion,  fait 
aussi  un  Roman  intitule  '  Frideric  de  Sicile';"  166,  cxviii :  '' II  y  a  une 
Dame  a  Paris  nominee  Daunoi  qui  compose  plusicurs  Romans  ingeni- 
eux.     .      .      ." 

'D.  XI.  40,  Navarre;  O.  D.  I.  L.   114;  O.  D.   IV.  528.  iii;  574.  xxxii. 

•O.  D.  I.  157,  viii;   195,  iv ;  651,  i. 


Fiction  17 

tion,  any  merit  as  an  idealization.  It  is  natural  enougli  that 
the  positive,  unromantic  Bayle  should  not  be  aroused  by  the 
coloring  of  fiction,  especially  in  view  of  the  inferiority  of  most 
of  the  novels  which  he  had  a  chance  to  peruse.  What  occupies 
him  is  fact.  Beyond  one  or  two  incidental  remarks  on  the  proper 
subjects  for  novels,  the  questions  he  considers  are :  whether  a 
novel  is  true  to  life,  whether  it  introduces  a  combination  of 
romance  and  history,  whether  its  practical  effect  on  tiie  reader 
is  moral  or  otherwise. 

The  natural  subject  for  a  novel  is  love;  the  romancers  have 
set  that  up  for  themselves  as  a  law.^"  But  it  is  the  courtship 
alone  that  is  to  be  related,  for  to  write  of  married  life  is  absurd. 
Longus  may  be  criticised  in  this  regard."  Bayle  does  not  believe 
that  novelists  will  again  introduce  the  pastoral  romance;  the 
pastoral  will  henceforth  belong  to  poets  alone. ^- 

In  order  to  maintain  the  illusion  of  the  reader  there  should  be 
vraisemblance.  The  true  pleasure  of  fiction  comes  when  the 
reader  persuades  himself  that  he  is  learning  of  something  which 
actually  happened.  If  incongruous  and  improbable  elements  are 
introduced  the  spell  is  broken  and  he  realizes  that  it  is  only  a 
story  after  all.^^ 

The  rules  of  probability  are  upset  by  the  excessive  prudery 
which  romancers  attribute  to  their  heroines. 

La  vertu  va  beaucoup  plus  loin  en  ce  pay-la,  que  dans  notre  monde : 
c'est  apparemment  une  des  principales  raisons  qui  ont  fait  qu'on  s'est 
degoiite  de  ceUe  sorte  d'Ouvrages." 

The  seventeenth  century  writers  are  guilty  in  this  regard.  Mile. 
de  Scudery  and  her  contemporaries  would  represent  a  heroine 
as  resisting  too  valiantly  and  too  successfully  the  seductions  of 
a  lover  who  has  kidnapped  her.  These  novelists  observe  the 
demands  of  vraisemhlance  when  they  portray  a  heroine  as  strug- 
gling at  the  start  against  such  abduction,  for  of  course  she 
realizes  that  she  will  be  compromised.     But  a   long-continued 

"D.   XI.  41,  Navarre,  note   (i). 

^^D.  IX.  355,  Longus.  B:  "Une  heroine  de  roman  grosse  et  accouchee 
est  un  etrange  personnage."  Note  that  in  his  comments  here  Bayle  merely 
echoes  and  enlarges  on  the  opinion  of  Huet.  Elsewhere  he  advances  the 
same  statement  independently:   D.  VII.   552,  Heliodore. 

"O.  D.  L  651. 

"  O.  D.  I.  L.  142.  xcvi ;  of.  O.  D.  I.  650,  i. 

"  O.  D.  I.  195,  iv. 


1 8  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

resistance  is  not  likely,  and  to  hold  that  a  lover  would  undertake 
such  a  hazardous  affair  without  being  reasonably  sure  of  suc- 
cess is  absurd.  Furthermore  it  is  nonsense  to  picture  a  lover 
sueing  ardently  for  the  hand  of  a  lady  who  has  already 
been  kidnapped  by  rivals;  it  is  not  probable  that  her  char- 
acter is  above  reproach.  Bayle's  criticisms  are  doubtless  tinged 
by  the  fact  that  his  conception  of  love  is  far  from  romantic.^^ 

Authors  have  finally  recognized  this  lack  of  probability  in 
their  stories  and  have  begun  to  improve  matters.  The  novel 
entitled  Les  Dames  Galantcs  on  la  Coniidence  reciproque  shows 
that  a  change  is  taking  place.  Here  two  women  of  easy  morals 
relate  to  each  other  their  adventures  with  a  frankness  that  is 
refreshing.^"  Other  contemporary  novels  indicate  the  same 
regard  for  truth,  the  same  freedom  from  the  prudery  which 
had  characterized  the  genre.  The  heroines  in  Ariane  act  like 
ordinary  women  of  the  time.  La  Duchesse  de  Montpensier  and 
the  novels  of  Allle.  des  Jardins  show  that  attention  is  being  paid 
to  writing  stories  which  shall  be  natural  and  probable.^^ 

Yet  Bayle  does  not  dwell  on  the  need  for  vraisemhlance  with 
any  particular  insistence.  He  believes  it  desirable  and  once  or 
twice,  as  has  been  noted,  he  speaks  with  a  momentary  vigor 
on  the  subject.  But  apparently  he  does  not  think  it  worth 
while  to  lay  down  many  hard  and  fast  rules  in  regard  to  a  kind 
of  literature  which  at  best  has  no  very  serious  purpose  and  no 
particular  claims  to  consideration.     The  tales  of  fiction  are  idle, 

"D.  VII.  530,  Helena,  E.  Cf.  D.  VI.  312,  Etampes.  L;  D.  VII.  390, 
Guise,  sub-note  z^;  D.  VII.  535,  Helene,  L;  D.  IX.  355.  Longus,  C, 
(where  the  unnatural  virtue  of  heroes  is  blamed);  O.  D.  I.  650,  i; 
O.  D.  I.  735 ;  O.  D.  Ill,  75,  cxii. 

O.  D.  II.  303-8,  Letter  XXI  of  the  Noiivelles  Lcttres  Critiques  sur 
I'Histoire  du  Calvinismc.  This  also  contains  a  criticism  of  the  excessive 
and  improbable  virtue  of  the  characters  of  fiction.  This  letter  is  undoubt- 
edly written  by  Bayle,  but  he  represents  it  as  written  by  a  certain  M. 
Crisante,  who  is  disputing  with  him  about  the  marriage  of  the  clergy, 
and  who  advances  these  remarks  on  vraisemhlance  in  connection  with 
one  of  his  arguments.  The  single  point  made  by  M.  Crisante  is  the  one 
noted  above  as  Bayle's  own :  fiction  writers  are  to  be  censured  for  endow- 
ing their  heroes  and  heroines  with  unheard-of  prudery.  Among  other 
novels  criticised  for  lack  of  vraisemhlance  in  this  particular  is  La  Prin- 
cesse  de  Cldves. 

"O.  D.  I.  195,  iv. 

"  O.  D.  II.  323-     Cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  59- 


Fiction  ig 

grotesque,  tiresome,  decidedly  inferior  to  writings  in  which  facts 
alone  are  dealt  with  and  in  which  there  is  no  attempt  to  embroider 
the  truth. ^'*  One  must  not  ask  much  of  such  stories.  Many 
references  to  the  anachronisms,  extravagances  and  chimerical 
adventures  found  in  romans  indicate  that  Bayle  looks  on  these 
as  typical.^"  He  does  not  expect  that  the  characters  of  a  novel 
be  made  subject  to  the  restrictions  of  ordinary  existence;  it  is 
a  simple  matter,  he  says,  to  credit  them  with  this  or  that  remark- 
able quality  according  to  the  exigencies  of  the  case: 

lorsqu'on  se  fait  des  personnages  de  rimagination  ...  on  leur  fait 
coniprendre  tout  ce  que  Ton  veut ;  on  nage  en  pleine  mer,  on  dispose  a 
sa  fantaisie  de  leur  coeur  et  de  leur  esprit.  On  fait  toutes  ces  choses 
bien  plus  aisement  que  la  Nature  ne  les  produit  dans  des  sujets  tres 
reels.'" 

The  practice  of  mingling  history  and  fiction  is  prevalent  in 
Bayle's  time.  Such  a  compound  is  frequent  in  court  memoirs, 
and  in  romances  which  purport  to  reveal  the  secret  loves  of 
some  member  of  royalty.  The  authors  and  publishers  under- 
stand that  such  tales  are  more  popular  when  they  are  supposed 
to  have  a  foundation  in  fact,  hence  they  do  their  utmost  to 
persuade  the  reader  that  their  books  contain  an  element  of 
truth.2i 

The  custom  is  unpardonable.^^  A  romancer  must  not  take 
historical  facts  as  a  basis  for  his  tale  and  embellish  them  as 
may  happen  to  suit  the  whim  of  his  imagination ;  he  must  not 


''D.  I.  329,  Aimon;  D.  VIII.  486-7,  Junius,  F;  D.  XI.  41,  Navarre; 
O.  D.  I.  L.  49;  O.  D.  III.  708;  O.  D.  IV.  729,  clxxxiv. 

'"D.  IV.  569,  Castille,  A;  D.  V.  229.  Claude,  G;  D.  V.  234,  Cleonyme, 
B;  D.  V.  393,  Dassouci,  D;  D.  VI.  280,  Esope,  C;  D.  VI.  498,  Flora,  F; 
D.  VII.  405,  Guise;  D.  XI.  255.  Origene,  E;  D.  XII.  150,  Pytheas,  C; 
D.  XII.  478,  Rauber,  D;  D.  XIII.  7,  Sadeur;  O.  D.  I.  426;  O.  D.  II. 
651;   O.  D.  III.  639,  Ixix. 

Cf.  D.  VII.  323,  Guevara,  B  :  "  Ceux-ci  (writers  of  romans)  ne  trompent 
personne ;  car  ils  ne  demandent  pas  qu'on  prenne  pour  vrai  tout  ce  qu'ils 
debitent ;  ils  n'aspirent  qu'a  la  gloire  de  faire  approuver  leurs  fictions 
comme  des   choses  ingenieusement  forgees ;     .      .      ." 

^°0.  D.  I.  547.  Cf.  D.  XV.  274,  Eclaircissement  stir  les  Athces,  Section 
IX;  O.  D.  I.  157. 

"D.  XL  152,  Nidhard,  C. 

^  Cf.  D.  XIII.  273,  Sforce  (3),  E:  a  reference  to  novelists  who  write 
"tant  de  mauvais  ecrits  qui  paraissent  tous  les  jours,  011  Ton  ente  sur 
les  faits  reels  cent  fables  et  cent  chimeres." 


20  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

give  his  characters  the  names  of  historical  personnages  and 
then  make  them  act  according  to  the  requirements  of  his  inven- 
tion. By  this  pernicious  habit  the  romancers  poison  even  the 
most  recent  facts  of  history,  as  in  the  case  of  the  story  which 
claims  to  relate  the  life  and  death  of  Kara  Mustapha,  Grand 
Vizier  of  Turkey,  who  besieged  Vienna  in  1683.^^  Bayle's  ire 
is  aroused  by  the  thought  that  a  writer  of  fiction  should  trifle 
with  such  a  subject.  His  interest  in  facts  and  his  contempt  for 
petites  pieces  de  galanterie  are  brought  out  here.-*  It  is  impor- 
tant, he  says,  that  this  historical  event  should  be  understood, 
that  the  circumstances  should  be  well  known ;  a  novelist  has  no 
business  to  dabble  with  such  an  affair  and  confuse  it  by  his 
fictions.  Moreover  it  is  disgraceful  to  attribute  to  royal  char- 
acters, still  in  active  life — even  if  they  are  Turks — gallantries 
of  such  compromising  nature  as  this  particular  writer  introduces. 
It  would  be  best  that  authors  devote  themselves  either  wholly 
to  fiction  or  wholly  to  history.  Or  at  least,  if  they  do  introduce 
history  into  a  romance,  they  should  make  it  clear  what  is  fact 
and  what  is  not.^^  Bayle  commends  the  practice  of  Mile,  des 
Jardins  in  stating  at  the  outset  that  the  story  she  is  to  relate 
is  merely  a  product  of  her  imagination. -*"' 

The  moral  effect  of  novels  is  not  to  be  disregarded.  Fictitious 
accounts  of  love-affairs  of  doubtful  character  may  be  harmful 
in  the  extreme,^''  and  the  delicacy  and  subtlety  of  some  of  the 
recent  fiction  make  it  all  the  more  pernicious,   for  the  poison 

^'  O.  D.  I.  157,  viii.  The  roman  is  entitled :  Cara  Mustapha  Grand 
Visir.  Histoire  contenant  son  elevation,  ses  amours  dans  le  Serail,  ses 
divers  emplois,  le  vrai  sujet  qui  lui  a  fait  entreprendre  le  Siege  de  Vienne, 
et  les  particularites  de  sa  mort.  The  author  writes  that  a  love  affair  of 
the  Grand  Vizier  was  the  cause  of  the  war. 

°*  Bayle  is  inconsistent  once  or  twice,  stating  that  the  element  of  history 
in  a  particular  novel  interests  him.  Facts  please  him  so  that  perhaps 
he  forgets  for  a  moment  the  mistake  of  presenting  them  in  such  a  form. 
Cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  15,  22-3;  O.  D.  I.  405- 

"D.  XI.  152,  Nidhard,  C.  Cf.  D.  XII.  18.  Pheron.  B ;  O.  D.  I.  381, 
vi ;  O.  D.  I.  406.  i ;  O.  D.  III.  737. 

"D.  VIII.  332-3.  Jardins,  A.  And  yet  even  this  lady  is  to  be  blamed, 
says  Bayle,  for  the  deplorable  way  in  which  she  confuses  fact  and  fiction. 
Note  that  he  gives  Mile,  des  Jardins  the  credit  for  bringing  into  fashion 
the  petites  Iiistoricttcs  (/alantcs  which  succeeded  such  novels  as  the  Ch'o- 
patrc  and   the  Cyrus. 

"O.   D.   III.  640-50.     Cf.   O.   D.   IV.   186:    "les   Romans     ...     les 


Fiction  2 1 

is  disguised  by  a  sugar  coating.-"  Un  the  other  hand,  a  novel 
may  exert  a  beneficial  influence,  and  the  attempt  to  point  a 
moral  is  praiseworthy.-*'  It  will  not  do  to  distort  historical  facts 
in  this  effort,  for  a  combination  of  history  and  romance  in 
which  a  familiar  character  is  connected  with  events  which  the 
reader  knows  never  happened  has  little  power  to  convince  him.^*' 
But  a  roman  which  twists  the  facts  of  everyday  existence  and 
represents  a  heroine  as  endowed  with  superhuman  virtue  is  less 
reprehensible  than  one  which  follows  unpleasant  realities  too 
strictly. ^^ 

This  inconsistency — for  Bayle  has  dwelt  elsewhere,  as  has 
been  noted,  on  the  need  of  not  endowing  heroines  with  unusual 
virtue — is  characteristic  of  his  general  attitude  towards  fiction. 
Another  contradiction,  w^hich  has  been  referred  to,  is  that  on 
several  occasions  he  protests  vigorously  against  introducing 
history  into  fiction,  but  declares  in  other  places,  though  only 
in  passing,  that  what  attracts  him  in  certain  novels  is  the  element 
of  chronicled  fact.^^  In  a  word,  Bayle  is  not  free  from  contra- 
dictions on  the  two  points  which  seem  to  occupy  him  the  most 
in  his  criticisms  of  novels.  He  does  not  consider  this  kind  of 
literature  seriously,  and  is  a  little  inclined  to  waver  in  his  views; 
his  opinions  lack  the  definiteness  of  his  criticisms  on  a  genre 
such  as  history,  which  he  esteems  highly.  The  fact,  however, 
that  Bayle  comments  so  frequently  on  fiction  in  its  relation  to 
truth  lends  a  certain  unity  to  his  remarks. 

Ouvragcs  de  galanterie,  qui  ne  peuvent  que  corrompre  les  bonnes  moeurs 
des  jeunes  gens." 

''O.  D.  III.  648-9. 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  650,  i.  Bayle  is  speaking  of  a  roman  which  copies  nature 
with  some  faithfulness  and  he  says :  "  phisieurs  personnes  de  bon  sens 
sont  persuadees  qu'un  Roman  tel  que  celui-ci  n'est  pas  aussi  pernicieux 
que  les  autres,  oil  Ton  voit  des  gens  de  I'un  et  de  I'autre  sexe  qui  s'aiment 
le  plus  galamment  et  le  plus  tendrement  du  monde,  sans  prejudice  de 
la  chastete.  Cela  fait  croire  aux  jeunes  personnes  que  I'amour  n'est  point 
a  craindre,  et  qu'on  peut  s'y  engager  impunement.  On  s'y  engage  done 
sur  cette  esperance  et  souvent  Ton  ne  s'en  tire  qu'avec  honte.  Si  Ton 
avoit  vii,  comme  on  le  voit  dans  ce  Livre,  que  cette  passion  fait  tomber 
dans  les  infidelitez  les  plus  fletrissantes,  peut-etre  qu'on  s'en  seroit  defie." 

"O.  D.  I.  381,  vi. 

*>  O.  D.  I.  406,  i. 

•*D.  VIII.  156-7,  Hypsipyle,  C.     Cf.  D.  Yl.  339,  Eve.   L. 

*"  Cf .  supra,  p.  20,  note  24. 


Ill 

POETRY 

The  fact  that  Bayle  does  not  have  a  very  high  esteem  for 
poetry  may  be  gathered  from  the  shghting  remarks  which  he 
makes  about  writers  of  verse,  as  a  class.  They  are  jealous,^ 
frequently  impecunious,-  inclined  to  exaggerate  their  poverty 
in  order  to  get  help  from  their  patrons,^  and  given  to  flattery.* 
They  make  themselves  ridiculous  by  their  importunities ;  they 
insist  upon  reciting  their  verses  to  all  comers,  and  they  stop  at 
every  word  to  discuss  details  until  lines  that  might  otherwise 
be  pleasing  are  utterly  spoiled.  Bayle  thanks  Heaven  that  he 
is  not  as  one  of  these,  and  claims  that  being  only  a  writer  of 
prose  he  is  less  of  a  burden  to  his  friends.^  The  laments  of 
poets  must  not  be  taken   seriously  when  they  cry  out  against 


'D.  VI.  358,  Euripide,  K;  cf.  D.  XL  649,  Perse  (2)  ;  ibid.  652,  D. 

''D.  I.  403,  Alcman;  D.  VII.  117,  Gombauld,  B;  cf.  D.  XIV.  253-9, 
Tristan  (2),  B.  C. :  Railers  often  exaggerate  the  poverty  of  poets,  though 
it  is  indeed  great.  Bayle  suggests  that  the  carelessness  and  dissipations 
of  poets  often  make  them  lose  what  they  have. 

'D.  III.  319,  Benserade,  E;  D.  III.  440,  Billaut,  B. 

*D.  I.  486,  Amboise;  D.  I.  529,  Ammonius;  D.  II.  459,  Artavasde  II. 
A;  D.  III.  125,  Barleus,  A;  D.  IX.  340,  Lollius,  F;  O.  D.  II.  348. 

Cf.  D.  VI.  51,  Drusus  (3),  C:  "  un  poete  qui  chante  les  victoires  et 
les  triomphes  d'un  prince,  ne  renonce  a  I'hyperbole  fabuleuse  que  lorsqu'il 
n'en  a  point  de  besoin.  Ceux  qui  lisent  les  poesies  modernes  conviendront 
de  ceci,  et  croiront  sans  peine  que  les  poetes  de  la  cour  d'Auguste  etaient 
animes  du  meme  esprit  que  les  poetes  du  temps  present." 

Cf.  infra,  p.  93,  n.  30. 

"  O.  D.  IV.  538:  "En  effet  un  roete  ne  niarche  jamais  qu'a  cheval : 
un  Auteur  en  prose  jamais  que  sur  ]e  Haquenee  des  Cordeliers.  Or  il  est 
bien  plus  commode  de  loger  un  homme  seule,  qu'un  homme  avec  son 
cheval,  surtout  quand  on  n'a  point  d'ecurie." 

On  the  affection  of  poets  for  their  verses  cf .  D.  IV.  272,  Rusbec,  H ; 
D.  IV.  596.  Catullc,  E;  D.  IX.  381,  Lotichius  (2),  G;  D.  XI.  65S, 
Perse   (2),  F. 


Poetry  23 

their  lack  of  success  in  love,"  for  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  esprit 
of  these  gentlemen  gives  them  great  power  over  the  fair  sex.^ 
Writing  poetry  is  only  a  jeii  d'esprit.  This  may  be  recognized 
whatever  subject  a  poet  takes  up.  How  many  love  verses  there 
are  in  writing  which  the  bard  is  inspired,  not  by  deep  passion, 
but  by  a  wish  to  exercise  his  poetic  invention  !®  A  poet  who  is 
only  slightly  aftected  by  the  charms  of  a  lady  will  strive  and 
strain  in  order  to  give  some  new  turn  to  his  verse  and  thus 
flatter  her  and  gain  applause  from  his  fellows.  And  there  are 
some  who  indulge  in  such  compositions  without  being  in  the 
least  in  love.  A  poet  may  touch  upon  the  most  lofty  themes  of 
religion  and  yet  not  be  inspired  by  any  divine  faith.®  It  is 
likely  enough  that  he  chooses  the  subject  merely  because  it  gives 
him  a  chance  to  show  ingenuity,  command  of  language,  power 
of  literary  expression.  Another  day  he  is  quite  as  apt  to  choose 
a  subject  of  a  very  different  nature  provided  it  fits  the  require- 
ment of  the  moment.  So  that  lofty  sentiments,  expressed  in 
this  way,  have  no  authority.  On  the  other  hand,  one  must  not 
censure  a  poet  too  severely  for  introducing  remarks  which  are 
against  the  principles  of  religion  or  morals.  Here  again  he  is 
only  giving  rein  to  his  imagination ;  it  is  not  serious." 

'O.  D.  II.  22,2,  xii. 

'  O.  D.  II.  290-1.  This  was  especially  true,  says  Bayle,  at  the  time  of 
Marot,  when  writers  of  ingenious  and  gallant  poetry  were  rare,  but  it 
holds  good  even  in  the  brilliant  seventeenth  century.  Cf.  D.  VII.  393, 
Guise,  O;  O.  D.  II.  326. 

'  D.  IX.  378,  Lotichius,  F.  Bayle  states  here  that  he  does  not  think 
a  poetic  temperament  makes  a  man  especially  susceptible  to  love. 

•D.  VII.  28,  Garasse,  I.     Cf.  O.  D.  III.  923,  sections  III  and  VI. 

"D.  VII.  27,  Garasse,  I.  Cf.  supra,  p.  14,  n.  15,  ref.  to  D.  XIV.  291-2, 
Vayer,  D. 

On  the  light,  irresponsible  character  of  poetry  in  general  cf.  D.  II.  39, 
Anaxagoras,  F;  D.  IV.  583,  Catius,  C;  D.  VI.  554.  Frangois,  K;  D.  VIII. 
4.  Renault,  D;  D.  VIII.  444,  Jules  II.  F ;  D.  V  246,  Colonna :  "  une  de 
ces  protestations  poetiques,  dont  il  ne  faut  pas  tenir  plus  de  compte  que 
des  parjures  des  amans ;"  O.  D.  I.  715. 

On  the  follieg  and  extravagances  found  in  poetry  cf:  D.  I.  201,  Adam, 
E;  D.  I.  423,  Aleandre,  F;  D.  I.  538,  Amphiaraus,  C;  D.  II.  485.  Asty- 
anax,  B;  D.  II.  545,  Averroes,  P;  D.  III.  409,  Beze,  S;  D.  III.  '518, 
Bodin,  N;  D.  V.  169-170,  Chrysippe  (2),  H;  D.  VIII.  509,  Junon,  M; 
D.  X.  149,  Majus,  C;  D.  X.  374,  Melampus,  H;  D.  XIV.  65,  Teleboes, 
D;  O.  D.  I.  L.  87;  O.  D.  III.  18;  O.  D.  III.  343. 

If  a  poem  is  avowedly  dogmatic   in  nature,   if  it   advances   a  definite 


2  4  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

Bayle  is  impressed  by  the  wholesale  fashion  in  which  a  poet 
exercises  his  power  of  invention. ^^  The  imagination  is  most 
important.  \'ersifiers  are  in  the  habit  of  following  the  dictates 
of  fancy,  describing  things  which  they  never  saw  and  which 
never  existed.  Sometimes  a  poet  believes  himself  inspired ;  he 
has  a  dream,  wakes  up  with  the  impression  of  it  still  fresh 
and  hastens  to  record  what  he  considers  a  marvel.  But  it  is 
likely  enough  that  the  conception  his  dream  presents  is  one 
that  has  been  in  his  mind  during  the  waking  hours.  There  is 
a  particular  strain  on  the  imagination  when  it  is  used  so  much, 
and  a  poet  should  retire  from  the  service  of  Apollo  before  his 
inspiration  is  exhausted  and  he  becomes  insipid. ^^ 

Poetry  then  is  not  a  very  serious  occupation.  The  poet  works 
his  imagination  hard,  exercises  his  wits,  and  produces  some- 
thing clever.  As  in  the  case  of  fiction,  poetry  writing  is  not 
important  enough,  from  Bayle's  point  of  view,  to  make  him  think 
it  worth  while  to  lay  down  precepts  for  the  art  with  any 
insistence.  Indeed,  it  has  been  noted^^  that  he  has  countenanced 
loose  moral  and  religious  ideas  in  poetry.     But  on  this  score  he 

philosophical  system  in  verse,  the  author  is  as  responsible  as  though  he 
wrote  in  prose.     D.  IV.  177,  Brunus,  D. 

"D.  IX.  382,  Lotichius   (2),  G. 

"  D.  V.  426,  Daurat,  O.  "  Le  service  des  muses  sympathise  en  bien 
des  choses  avec  le  service  des  dames ;  il  vaut  mieux  s'en  retirer  trop 
tot  que  trop  tard."  Cf.  D.  III.  581,  Borgarutius,  A;  a  mention  of  the 
reluctance  of  poets  to  retire;  O.  D.  I.  716. 

Elsewhere  there  is  a  statement  about  the  retirement  from  activity  of 
authors  in  general :  "  chacun  devroit  .  .  .  se  faire  des  bornes  pour 
la  production  des  livres  qui  est  une  maniere  de  generation  a  quoi  tout 
age  n'est  nullement  propre."     D.  I.  239,  Afer,  B. 

On  the  inspiration  of  poets,  cf .  O.  D.  IV.  37 :  "  Vous  n'ignorez  pas 
quels  sont  les  effets  de  la  fureur  poetique.  Elle  donne  des  pensees  et 
des  expressions  qui  rendent  un  homme  aussi  superieur  a  lui-nieme  qu'il 
est  superieur  aux  hommes  vulgaires  dans  son  etat  naturel."  Bayle  adds : 
"  Or  vous  savez  que  la  prose  a  sa  veine,  sa  verve,  ses  enthousiasmes." 
Cf.  also  D.  XI.  336-7,  Pays,  H:  "Les  muses  d'un  homme  ne  sont  jamais 
plus  eloquentes,  ni  plus  vives,  ni  plus  f econdes  en  pensees,  que  dans  de  • 
semblables  occasions."  (When  he  is  indignant  at  an  attack.)  The  pre- 
ceding sentence  is  worth  quoting:  "II  est  permis.  je  m'assurc,  de  con- 
jecturcr  qu'un  poele,  qui  a  si  bien  reussi  a  faire  I'eloge  du  tabac.  cxprime 
tres-bien  dans  Ic  meme  tome  son  chagrin  contre  I'injusticc  d'un  cruel 
arret." 

"  Cf .    supra,   p.   23. 


Poetry  25 

is  by  no  means  always  lenient — at  times,  in  fact,  lie  takes  a  very 
definite  stand  on  the  other  sitlc. 

Baylc  points  out  the  particularly  bad  influence  which  writers 
of  verse  may  have  on  morals  from  the  fact  that  they  are  able 
to  give  an  insidious  charm  to  their  remarks  by  the  attractive 
form  in  which  they  present  them.^*  Modern  poetry  has  been 
attacked  with  justice  in  the  matter  of  immorality.^''  Poets  pro- 
fane Christianity,  even  though  they  do  it  unwittingly,  by  the 
absurd  extravagances  which  are  supposed  to  bring  honor  to  the 
Holy  \'irgin  and  tlic  Saints  of  Paradise,^"  and  their  effrontery 
in  other  cases  is  detestable  •}'' 

il  est  certain  que  les  Poetes  se  sont  mis  en  possession  de  falsifier  tout, 
et  que  si  Ton  examinoit  a  la  rigueur  les  vers  de  nos  Poetes  Chretiens 
sur  d'autres  matieres  que  sur  des  sujets  pieux,  a  peine  leur  resteroit- 
il  un  Sonnet,  une  Ode  ou  une  Chanson,  qui  ne  fussent  pas  infectez 
d'heresie,   d'inipiete   ou  de   flateries  profanes. '' 

In  view  of  these  various  remarks  it  would  seem  that  Bayle's 
attitude  towards  poetry  was  one  either  of  indift'erence  or  of 
disapproval.  While  it  does  not  occur  to  him  that  the  poet's 
power  of  imagination  may  be  used  to  serve  many  noble  ends, 
that  it  may  enable  him  to  tell  what  others  only  feel,  and  give 
expression  to  aspirations  which  others  only  dimly  conceive,  he 
does  see  the  value  of  this  power  in  one  instance.  The  under- 
standing of  poetry  and  the  ability  to  write  poetry  are  useful  to 
a  man  who  sets  out  to  compose  a  history.^®    A  historian  who  is 

"D.  VII.  27,  Garasse,  I. 

"D.  VII.  441,  Hadrien  VI.  D. 

For  short  comments  against  immoralities  in  poetry,  cf.  D.  II.  436, 
Arodon,  A;  D.  III.  298,  Bembus ;  D.  III.  396,  Beze ;  D.  VI.  326,  Eve; 
D.  XIV.  293,  Vayer,  E;  O.  D.  III.  81,  cxxvi. 

On  the  tendency  of  poets  to  be  obscene,  cf.  D.  X.  321,  Marot,  M. 

"  O.  D.  III.  80,  cxxv :  Furthermore  it  is  not  fair  to  attack  the  pagan 
religion  of  the  ancients  on  the  basis  of  the  poetic  representations  of  their 
gods,  for  the  poets  lightly  attributed  to  their  divinities  every  vicious  and 
ridiculous  weakness.     Cf.  D.  VI.  loi,  Egialee,  C. 

Although  such  poems  are  deplorable,  there  may  be  cases  where  sacred 
poetry  is  at  least  preferable  to  profane.  D.  II.  381,  Arius,  L;  D.  XIV. 
341,  Vegius. 

Bayle  objects  to  introducing  profane  characters  into  sacred  poetry. 
D.  III.  321,  Benserade,  G. 

"Cf.  D.  III.  319,  Benserade,  E;  D.  VI.  500  Fontarabie,  C. 

"  O.  D.  III.  80,  cxxv. 

"0.  D.  III.  191-2. 


26  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

fortunate  enough  to  possess  this  poetic  feehng  and,  at  the  same 
time,  the  orator's  power  of  rhetorical  expression,  may  thereby 
add  greatly  to  the  dignity  and  vividness  of  his  writings,  though 
he  must  hold  himself  in  check  and  not  be  carried  away  by 
his  poetic  vein  or  by  any  tendency  to  declaim.^^ 

si  la  vigilance  de  rEcrivain  lui  fait  prevenir  la  contagion  de 
la  Poetique  et'  de  la  Rhetorique,  il  peut  esperer  un  grand  avantage  de  la 
connoissance  de  ces  deux  arts,  puisque  d'un  cote  il  se  garantit  de  tout 
ce  qui  ne  conviendroit  pas  assez  a  la  gravite  de  I'histoire,  et  que  de 
I'autre  il  communique  a  ses  narrations  les  nerfs,  la  vivacite,  la  noblesse 
et  la  majeste  qu'elles  demandent  et  sans  quoi  elles  seroient  tres- 
defectueuses.'^ 

It  is  striking  for  Bayle  to  concede  that  the  spirit  of  poetry 
lends  dignity  to  a  history,^-  in  view  of  the  way  he  has  branded 
poetry  as  frivolous.  Note  that  the  case  in  which  he  does  grant 
any  merit  to  this  kind  of  literature  is  where  it  has  a  certain 
relation  to  matters  of  fact. 

Bayle  does  not  devote  much  attention  to  details  of  style  and 
technique  in  poetry.^^  He  does  not  set  himself  up  as  a  judge 
of  the  merit  of  poems  and  often  he  is  content  to  rely  on  the 
opinions  of  others.-*  What  criticisms  do  occur  are  miscel- 
laneous in  character.  There  are  one  or  two  references  to  points 
of  versification,-''  occasional  comments  on  the  use  of  a  figure  or 
fable,^*  on  the  force  or  clearness  of  a  particular  expression.-^ 
Bayle  recognizes  that  the  melody  of  a  poem,  the  eflfect  on  the 


^  Young  and  immature  writers,  Bayle  adds,  are  especially  apt  to  lack 
this  necessary   self-control. 

^  O.  D.  III.  192,  ii. 

''Ci.  O.  D.  III.  191,  ii. 

"  Bayle  urges  his  younger  brother  when  he  translates  Latin  poetry  to 
study  each  expression  carefully,  to  grasp  the  exact  significance  of  every 
phrase,  to  understand  all  references  to  mythologj'.  to  appreciate  the 
figures  used.  But  the  object  here  is  scholarship,  not  a  sympathetic  under- 
standing of  good  poetry.    O.  D.  I.  L.  32. 

"D.  III.  443,  Bion;  D.  VII.  119-20,  Gombauld,  E;  O.  D.  I.  44^.  ii ; 
O.   D.   I.  L.  85,  Ivi. 

"D.  VII.  166,  Goudimel.  F;  D.  VIII.  380,  Jodelle ;  O.  D.  I.  L.  39- 

"D.  I.  152,  Achille  (2),  A;  D.  I.  231,  Adonis,  K;  D.  I.  546,  Amphiaraus, 
K;  D.  VII.   14,   Gambara. 

"  O.  D.  IV.  642-3.  Cf.  D.  II.  560,  Augustin,  I :  Bayle  says  that  poets 
and  orators  do  not  use  words  with  the  same  care  for  their  exact  meaning 
that  philosophers  display. 


Poetry  2  7 

ear,  is  imjiortant.-*'  He  protests  against  the  custom  of  over- 
loading poetry  with  minute  references  to  fable  and  anticiuity  in 
the  desire  to  make  a  show  of  erudition.^"  Anachronisms  in  poetry 
may  generally  be  excused,^"  but  there  is  a  limit  to  this  indulgence 
and  poets  must  not  take  liberties  with  ciironology  which  result 
in  absurd  falsehood. ^^  It  is  taken  for  granted  that  poetry  will 
abound  in  allusions  to  the  supernatural  and  to  the  marvellous. 
Poets 

sont  si  entetez  de  scmer  dans  leurs  Ouvragcs  plusicurs  descriptions 
pompcuses,  comme  sont  celles  dcs  prodiges,  et  de  donner  du  niervcilleux 
aux  avantures  de  leur  Heros :  que  pour  arriver  a  leurs  fins  ils  suposent 
mille   choscs   elonnantes.^ 

A  man  w-ho  starts  to  write  poetry  has  all  nature  at  his  com- 
mand ;  tempests,  eclipses,  comets,  monsters,  demons  and  angels, 
may  be  introduced  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  occasion.  Bayle 
accepts  the  pastoral  manner  as  it  is ;  he  sees  the  artificial  side 
of  it,  but  seems  to  think  one  may  as  well  yield  to  the  conven- 
tion.•'■''  It  does  not  enter  his  head  that  the  pastoral  is  ever  a 
graceful  ideal,  and  he  fails  to  understand  why  such  a  conceit 
should  have  been  handed  dow-n  from  Theocritus  through  Virgil 
to  modern  times.  There  is  very  little  vraisernhlan^e  in  the  pas- 
toral verses  that  modern  poets  produce — but  vraisemhlancc  would 
not  do  here.  In  ancient  times  shepherds  were  a  superior  class 
and  might  indeed  be  taken  as  models  for  gallantry ;  at  present, 
however,  such  swains  and  their  loves  as  they  are  found  in  real 
life  are  crude  rustics  w-hom  it  would  not  do  to  depict  in  poetry. 

''D.  XIV.  437,  Virgile.  L;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  164,  ii. 

-"D.  X.  371,  Melampus,  B ;  O.  D.  IV.  546-7. 

*»D.  IV.  582-3,  Catius.  C. 

"D.  IV.  597,  Catulle.   I. 

""O.  D.  III.  10,  iv.     Cf.  D.  XII.  I,  Phaon. 

^O.  D.  I.  634. 

In  the  letter  which  Bayle  presents  as  written  by  a  M.  Crisante  (O.  D. 
II-  303-8:  cf.  supra,  p.  18,  n.  15),  poets  as  well  as  romancers  and  dramatists 
are  accused  of  depicting  women  as  unnaturally  cold  and  prudish. 

Cf.  the  following  precept  as  to  the  hero  and  heroine  of  a  poem : 
"  Ulysse  etait  le  heros  du  poeme ;  il  fallait  done  necessairement  que  son 
epouse  y  pariit  comme  une  heroine  ou  pour  le  moins  en  honnete  femme. 
Ce  serait  pecher  contre  les  regies  les  plus  essentielles.  que  de  ne  point 
supprimer  toutes  les  actions  honteuses  de  la  femme  de  son  heros."  D. 
XI.  542,  Penelope,  K. 


IV 

DRAMA 

The  stage  productions  of  Bayle's  own  time  interest  him,^ 
and  he  makes  some  comment  on  dramatic  writing  in  general. 
He  refers  in  one  case  to  Les  Fcmmes  Savantcs  and  to  Psyche, 
a  tragedy-ballet,  and  states  that  he  could  hardly  say  which  piece 
pleases  him  most.^  He  is  interested  in  the  opera,  and  individual 
works  are  occasionally  praised.^  He  does  not  speak  highly 
of  dramatic  poets  and  actors,  suggesting  even  that  they  are 
insignificant,*  and  mentioning  them  as  flatterers.^ 

The  standards  for  dramatic  production,  the  rules  according 
to  which  plays  should  be  written,  are  determined  by  the  fact 
that  the  theatre  has  a  single  and  a  well  defined  object :  to  please. 
A  playwright  composes  a  piece  to  amuse  the  people,  and  if  he 
succeeds  in  giving  them  any  moral  instruction  it  is  accomplished 
through  pleasing  them."  If  there  is  any  case  where  it  is  true 
that  the  majority  should  rule,  says  Bayle,  it  is  here.  A  dramatist 
must  try  to  suit  everybody,  but,  since  this  is  naturally  difficult, 
he  will  do  well  to  adapt  himself  to  the  demands  of  the  crowd 


^For  mention  of  various  productions  cf.  D.  I.  371,  Albutius  (2),  G; 
D.  VIII.  130,  Hierophile,  A;  D.  VIII.  314.  Hutterus,  C;  O.  D.  I.  L. 
76,  xlviii,  78,  xlix ;  O.  D.  IV.  554 ;  O.  D.  IV.  834,  ccxcv. 

'O.  D.  I.  L.  22. 

"O.  D.  I.  L.  49,  116. 

The  music  and  the  machines  please  him  especially :  O.  D.  I.  L.  67. 
Without  these  the  opera  is  "  pitoyable :  "    O.  D.  I.  L.  65-66,  75,  78,  xlix. 

Bayle's  comment  on  music  is  worth  noting.  He  writes  to  his  younger 
brother:  "  je  suis  bien-aise  que  vous  aiez  du  gout  pour  la  musique.  c'est 
un  talent  qui  est  d'usage  dans  le  monde."     O.  D.  I.  L.  75. 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  114,  vii:  On  the  difficulty  of  understanding  the  words  sung 
in  opera.    Cf.  O.  D.  I.  651,  i:  a  ref.  to  opera  as  "la  maladie  a  la  mode." 

*0.  D.  I.  504,  i;  O.  D.  IV.  585,  xli.  Parts  of  this  letter  are  identical 
with  a  letter  to  Basnage  published  by  Gigas,  74-85.  under  tlic  date,  17 
November,  1674. 

"D.  II.  266,  Archelaus   (3),  H. 

'O.  D.  III.  200-203,  X. 


Drama  29 

and  not  be  troubletl  by  the  censure  of  the  cultured  few  who 
insist  on  adherence  to  set  rules. 

On  doit  considercr  la  Comedie  comme  un  repas  donne  au  pcuple, 
rimportance  est  done  que  Ics  viandes  paroissent  bonnes  aux  conviez,  et 
non  pas  qu'elles  aient  ete  apretees  selon  les  regies  de  I'art  de   Cuisine.' 

Among  those  dramatists  who  preferred  the  judgment  of  the 
people  to  that  of  the  critics  Bayle  names  Terence,  Pomponius 
Secundus,  Lope  de  \'ega,  Aloliere  and  Corneille. 

The  moral  instruction  which  a  drama  gives  may  be  consider- 
able. Bayle  doubts  if  a  playwright  can  make  any  headway 
against  the  capital  vices,  such  as  illicit  love,  envy,  avarice,  and 
downright  rascality ;  but  he  holds  that  the  theatre  may  attack, 
with  great  effectiveness,  petty  weaknesses. **  Moliere  has  suc- 
ceeded in  overwhelming  with  ridicule  fops  and  prudes,  devotees 
of  prcciositc,  would-be  marquises,  and  importunate  versifiers." 
Bayle  refers  to  a  comedy^"  where  the  trickery  of  a  procurcnr  is 
ridiculed,  and  admits  the  moral  good  sometimes  gained  by  such 
subtle  raillery.^^  Tragedy  as  well  as  comedy  may  point  a  moral. ^^ 
Yet  in  the  case  of  both  these  kinds  of  drama  the  opposite  effect 
must  be  guarded  against.  Aloliere  has  laid  himself  open,  in 
some  of  his  pieces,  to  the  charge  of  encouraging  coquetry.^^ 
Euripides  is  blamed  for  setting  a  bad  example  before  his  audi- 
ence in  the  case  of  Phccdra}^  Bayle  objects  to  the  profanities 
which  were  introduced  in  early  French  dramatic  productions. 
To  point  out  the  standards  in  the  sixteenth  century  he  cites  selec- 
tions from  the  Mystcrc  dcs  Actes  des  Apotres}'^  He  states 
that  the  quotations  he  gives 

suffiront  a  nous  apprendre  que  pendant  que  Ton  defendait  au  peuple 
de  voir  les  histoires  saintes   dans  le   Hvre  qui  les   contient  purement  et 

'  O.  D.  III.  202,  X. 

'O.  D.   I.  40,  vii. 

*  On  the  power  of  comedians  and  of  Moliere  in  particular  of.  Gigas, 
71-72. 

^''  Arlequin  Procureur.     O.  D.  I.  40,  vii. 

"  Cf.  Gigas,  69.  Here  Bayle  is  speaking  of  such  satirists  as  Moliere 
and  Boileau. 

"  Cf.  D.  XII,  476.  Rataller,  A. 

"O.  D.  I.  40,  vii. 

"D.  VI.  366,  Euripide,  Y. 

"  D.  V.  149,  Chocquet,  A.  Bayle  makes  a  mistake  in  attributing  the 
Mystere  des  Actcs  des  Apotres  to  Louis  Chocquet.   Cf.   O.  D.   IV.  829, 


30  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

fidelement  on  lui  permettait  de  les  voir  sur  le  theatre  souillees  de  mille 
inventions  grossieres,  dont  on  exprimait  la  plupart  d'une  fagon  basse 
et  en  style  de  farceur.^' 

In  regard  to  the  responsibility  of  a  dramatist  for  the  morals 
of  his  play,  Bayle  grants  that  it  is  absurd  to  hold  an  author 
answerable  for  all  the  opinions  which  he  makes  his  characters 
profess."  Yet  a  dramatist  may  go  to  such  extremes  that  he 
lays  himself  open  to  censure. 

II  est  bien  certain  que  I'auteur  d'une  tragedie  ne  doit  point  passer  pour 
croire  tous  les  sentimens  qu'il  etale,  mais  il  y  a  des  affections  qui 
decouvrent  ce  qu'on  pent  mettre  sur  son  compte;  et  quoi  qu'il  en  soit, 
on  pent  justement  interdire  le  theatre  a  certaines  pieces,  soit  que  I'auteur 
y  debite,   soit  qu'il  n'y   debite  pas   ses   sentimens." 

Vrai^emblance  is  often  upset  in  the  drama,  and  the  concep- 
tions of  life  seen  in  certain  comedies,  romans,  and  scmblahles 
petits  Livres,  are  sometimes  the  result  of  pure  invention.^* 
But,  if  discernment  is  exercised,  it  will  be  noted  that  many  of 
the  portrayals  of  dramatists  are  based  on  actual  conditions. 
Bayle  points  out  Le  Bourgeois  Gentilhomme  as  an  example.^" 
Moliere  would  never  have  conceived  such  a  piece  if  he  had  not 
been  quite  familiar  with  the  type  of  new-rich  individual  who 
feels  that  his  wealth  gives  him  rank,  and  who  affects  the 
manners  of  a  noble  gentleman.  The  exaggerations  in  the  piece 
are  patent ;  if  such  a  man  existed  in  real  life,  he  would  be 
assigned  a  guardian — but  the  railleries  are  based  on  fact.  The 
likeness  to  real  conditions  is  especially  evident  in  the  case  of 
comedies  which  attack  the  absurdities  of  married  life.-^  There 
is,  moreover,  an  excuse  for  the  exaggerations  of  dramatists;  a 
comedian  who  wishes   to  cure  some  absurdity  of  manners  or 


note  by  Desmaiseaux,  and  Michaund,  Biographic  UnizrrsclU-,  article  Louis 
Chocquet. 

"  D.  V.  149,  Chocquet,  A.  On  the  immoralities  in  the  drama  cf .  D. 
VI.  491,  Flora,  C,  sub-note  12;  D.  VII.  27,  Garasse,  I;  D.  IX.  305-6, 
Loyer,  E;  D.  IX.  566.  Luther,  S. 

"D.  VI.  350,  Euripide;  O.  D.  II.  712. 

"D.  VI.  265,  Eschyle,  F.  Cf.  D.  VI.  236,  Erasme,  Q.  Bayle  is  object- 
ing  to   profane   and   impious   sentiments   expressed    on   the   stage. 

'"O.  D.  II.  322-3. 

"O.  D.  II.  322. 

"  O.  D.  II.  323. 


Drama  31 

morals  must  draw  things  out  of  their  normal  proportions  in 
order  to  emphasize  the  weakness  attacked  and  drive  his  idea 
home.-* 

It  is  noteworthy  that  the  slight  criticism  which  Bayle  offers 
in  regard  to  particular  plays  is  concerned  with  matters  of  fact, 
with  the  question  of  adherence  to  probable  or  actual  happenings. 
He  commends  Racine  for  following  the  traditional  facts  in  his 
Berenice.'-^  The  dismissal  of  Berenice  is  in  accordance  with 
the  historical  facts,  and  our  author  thinks  that  Racine  represents 
the  love  of  Titus  as  less  strong  than  that  of  Berenice  in  order 
that  it  may  be  natural  for  him  to  dismiss  her.  Bayle  criticises, 
in  tiie  Agamemnon  of  Seneca,  Ajax'  long  continued  and 
extravagant  resistance  of  the  gods,  an  exaggeration  which  would 
not  be  tolerated  in  the  modern  theatre.-*  There  is  lack  of  z-rai- 
scmhlancc  in  the  abominable  passion  of  Chimene.  who  becomes 
affianced  to  the  murderer  of  her  father  on  the  day  of  the  crime. ^' 
A  pagan  poet  could  have  treated  the  subject  better,  for  he 
might  represent  Chimene  as  maddened  by  Venus.  But  Comeille 
is  wrong  in  writing  in  such  a  way,  and  he  has  been  censured 
with  justice  by  M.  de  Scudery. 

The  Amphitryon  of  Plautus  meets  with  criticism  on  several 
points.-^  Bayle  objects  to  treating  the  war  against  the  Tele- 
boans  as  though  it  were  waged  by  Amphitryon  in  behalf  of 
the  Theban  king,  Creon,  instead  of  being  carried  on  in  his  own 


"O.  D.  I.  570;  cf.  O.  D.  III.  973- 

For  references  to  lack  of  vraisemhlance  in  the  drama  cf.  D.  VII.  535, 
Helene.  K;  D.  XII.  114.  Pyrrhus,  E;  O.  D.  I.  7i. 

In  the  letter  from  M.  Crisante  (O.  D.  II.  308;  cf.  supra,  p.  18,  n.  15) 
Bayle  speaks  vigorously  against  the  lack  of  vraisemhlance  in  comedy. 
Among  other  things  he  objects  to  "  laquais  qui  fissent  un  message  en 
vers,''  to  Kings  and  Queens  who  ''  accusent  la  Fortune  par  des  sentences 
bien  rimees  et  bien  cadencees."  He  censures  the  Misanthrope  because  the 
hero  shows  a  weakness  and  a  stubborness  in  his  love  affair  which  are 
beyond  all  reason.  The  sincerity  of  the  opinions  expressed  in  this  letter 
is  doubtful.  It  is  unsafe  to  credit  Bayle  with  a  view  which  he  assigns 
to  his  opponent.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  opinions  on  things  literary  do 
not  vary  essentially  from  those  we  know  as  Bayle's  own. 

"D.  III.  351,  Berenice   (5).  D. 

»*D.  I.  313.  Ajax,  B. 

"O.  D.  III.  201. 

"  D.  XIV.  65-7,  Teleboes,  D,  E.  F. 


3  2  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

interests.  This  diminishes  the  importance  of  Amphitryon  in 
the  drama.  Plautus  should  have  taken  advantage  of  tradition, 
which  asserts  that  Amphitr}'on  was  the  instigator  and  director 
of  the  war ;  he  should  have  used  the  situation  to  the  credit  of 
his  hero.^^  The  geography  of  the  play  is  absurd,  for  the  The- 
bans  are  made  to  embark  at  the  Eubean  port  when  they  start 
out  for  the  Echinades  Islands.-"*  Plautus  shocks  vraiscmblance 
and  decency  too  when  he  represents  Jupiter  as  embracing 
Alcmena  the  night  before  she  gives  birth  to  twins.  The  dra- 
matist should  have  followed  tradition  and  dwelt  on  a  visit 
which  Jupiter  paid  her  some  months  before  and  should  have 
made  capital  out  of  that ;  he  should  not  have  supposed  a  second 
visit  on  la  veille  de  l' accouchement.^^  That  Plautus  represents 
Alcmena  as  being  delivered  without  pain  is  excusable,  for  here 
he  does  not  upset  tradition  in  any  essential,  and  the  incident 
helps  in  the  denouement  of  the  drama.  It  is  wrong  to  accuse 
Plautus  of  an  anachronism  when  he  represents  Amphitryon  as 


"As  a  matter  of  fact  there  are  only  casual  references  to  Creon  in  the 
play ;  and  the  king  in  no  way  makes  Amphitryon  less  important. 

^  D.  XIV.  67,  Teleboes,  F.  "  Quel  circuit,  bon  Dieu !  ne  faut-il  point 
faire  pour  aller  la,  si  Ton  s'embarque  a  I'ile  d'Eubee." 

-"  Bayle  asserts  here,  D.  XIV.  67.  Teleboes,  F,  that  Plautus  observes 
unity  of  time — which  is  true.  But  elsewhere.  D.  I.  408,  Alcmene,  D,  his 
words  imply  that  Plautus  did  not  observe  unity  of  time.  "  Dans  la 
comedie  de   Plaute  .     Amphitryon  y   laisse   sa   femme  grosse  en 

s'en  allant  a  la  guerre.  Grand  ragoiit  pour  Jupiter !  Ce  serait  bien  pis, 
si  Plaute  avait  observe  I'unite  de  temps  comme  le  veut  Mademoiselle 
le  Fevre.  II  faudrait  dire  en  ce  cas-la,  qu'en  arretant  le  soleil  Jupiter 
interrompit  tout  le  cours  de  la  nature,  afin  de  se  divertir  plus  long-temps 
avec  une  femme  grosse  de  deux  enfans,  et  si  proche  de  son  terme,  que 
pour  peu  qu'il  eiit  diflfere  sa  retraite,  la  sage  femme  aurait  ete  obligee  de 
lui  dire,  '  cedez-moi  la  place.'  C'est  une  facheuse  alternative  pour 
Plaute :  il  faut,  ou  que  sa  piece  dure  plusieurs  mois,  ou  qu'il  fasse  d'une 
femme  toute  prete  d'accoucher  de  deux  jumeaux,  un  des  plus  friands 
morceaux  du  monde  pour  le  plus  grand  de  tous  les  monarques ;  et  cela 
en  supposant  que  ce  maitre  des  Dieux  et  des  hommes  a  deja  produit  I'un' 
de  ces  jumeaux."  Either  Bayle's  manner  of  expression  or  his  ideas  on 
the  subject  are  confused.  Especially  since  he  goes  to  say:  "  Prenez  bien 
garde  que  ce  poete  ne  feint  pas  que  Jupiter  se  deguisa  en  Amphitryon, 
pour  venir  en  bon  mari  au  secours  d'Alcmenc  pendant  le  travail  d'enfant: 
c'etait  la  visite  d'un  homme  bien  amoureux." 


Drama  33 

killing  Ptcrclaus.  for  he  had  historical  authority  in  making  the 
two  men  contemporaries.  And  in  any  case  a  poet  does  not 
have  to  adhere  strictly  to  facts.'" 


*"  Note  that  in  another  detail  in  the  same  piece  Bayle  is  less  lenient. 
He  objects  to  speaking  of  the  Eubcan  port  as  the  Persian  port,  "  par  une 
anticipation   trop   liccncieuse."     D.    XIV.   67,   Teleboes,   E. 

Bayle  censures  the  "  mauvais  poetes  qui,  dans  une  piece  de  theatre,  se 
servaient  d'un  dieu  de  machine  pour  denouer  un  tres-petit  embarras." 
D.  XI.  296,  Ovide,  G;  cf.  D.  II.  44,  Anaxagoras,  G. 


ORATORY 

Our  author  is  not  over-familiar  with  the  eloquence  of  the 
Greeks  and  Romans,  nor  is  he  well  acquainted  with  the  pulpit 
eloquence  which  represents  the  most  important  oratory  of  his 
own  time.  The  masterpieces  which  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
produced  in  France  in  the  seventeenth  century  are  little  known 
to  the  refugee  at  Rotterdam.  He  is  better  acquainted  with 
Protestant  sermons,  but  confesses  he  does  not  like  them.  His 
inability  to  appreciate  the  rhetoric  of  the  Protestant  ministers 
provokes  the  remark,  in  a  letter  which  gives  evidence  of  bitter- 
ness and  discouragement : 

II  faut  que  je  n'aye  pas  le  gout  de  I'eloquence  de  la  Chaire,  et  il  est 
bien  plus  juste  de  penser  cela,  que  de  revoquer  en  doute  la  capacite  de 
ces   Messieurs.^ 

Doubtless  Bayle's  failure  to  value  the  efforts  of  the  Protestants 
of  his  day  is  excusable.  In  any  case  he  shows  little  enthusiasm 
about  any  kind  of  eloquence.  Once  or  twice  he  refers  to  a 
subject  as  a  good  one  for  an  orator,  as  offering  opportunity  for 
a  display  of  rhetoric.^  But  such  interest  is  only  momentary'. 
He  admits  that  oratory  can  be  made  use  of  with  considerable 
effect ;  public  speakers  have  power  to  do  much  good  or  much 
harm — particularly  the  latter.^ 

There  are  a  few  comments  on  general  features  of  eloquence, 
and  some  remarks  on  details  of  the  art.     Oratory  appeals  to 


'O.  D.  I.  L.  43- 

»D.  I.  206,  Adam,  L;  O.  D.  I.  188,  viii ;  O.  D.  I.  741,  iii ;  O.  D.  I.  L. 

44-S- 

'D.  IV.  11-12,  Bossu;  D.  V.  285,  Conon  (2),  D;  D.  XL  408,  Parthenai, 
A;  D.  XI.  621,  Pericles. 

It  should  be  noted  that  in  two  of  these  references,  the  first  and  third, 
Bayle  is   attacking  a   Catholic. 

Of  the  peculiarities  of  orators  as  a  class  Bayle  has  almost  nothing 
to  say.  He  refers  to  their  jealousies:  D.  II.  69,  Ancillon,  B;  D.  II. 
504,  Atticus,  B;  cf.  D.  VIII.  220,  Hortensius,  II. 


Oratory  3  5 

the  passions,  not  to  tlie  understanding.  Of  the  methods  of  men 
who  seek  to  sway  an  audience,  Bayle  says : 

Ces  Messieurs-la  ne  sc  soucient  gueres  d'eclairer  I'esprit ;  ils  se  con- 
tentent  de  persuader  par  rcntreniise  des  passions ;  ils  vont  droit  au  coeur 
et  non  pas  droit  a  I'entendement ;  ils  tachent  d'exciter  Tamour,  la  haine, 
la  colere ;     .     .     .* 

He  suggests  that  a  man  who  is  hot-blooded  is  apt  to  succeed 
in  declamation.^  Certain  conceptions  that  are  not  capable  of 
any  proof  may  be  used  most  effectively  by  a  speaker.  The 
idea,  for  instance,  that  the  appearance  of  a  comet  has  some 
mystic  import  may  be  so  developed  by  an  orator  as  to  impress 
his  audience  profoundly  and  win  him  much  more  credit  than 
any  mere  logical  discourse." 

An  orator  wants  above  all  to  affect  his  hearers ;  to  this  he 
devotes  more  attention  than  to  truth. ^  In  the  heat  of  declama- 
tion these  spell-binders  do  not  hesitate  to  exaggerate,  they 
emphasize  such  details  of  a  question  as  suit  their  purpose,  and 
they  suppress  whatever  may  harm  their  particular  cause.*  Law^- 
yers  are  especially  inclined  to  say  in  their  speeches  whatever 
meets  the  need  of  the  moment,  and  resulting  contradictions 
are  frequent.-' 

Oratory,  then,  is  generally  characterized  by  a  faux  eclat, ^'^  both 
in  the  style  of  reasoning  employed  and  the  amount  of  considera- 
tion paid  to  fact.  Bayle  objects  to  this.  A  sermon  which 
has    false    brilliancy    may    be    most    effective    in    the    pulpit, 


*0.  D.  III.  178;  cf.  D.  VI.  63.  Duaren,  B;  cf.  D.  XII.  155,  Pitiscus, 
A :  "  L'eloquence  armee  de  pompe,  et  de  figures,  est  necessaire  aux 
predicateurs:  un  raisonnement  sec  et  precis  a  la  mathematicienne  ne  leur 
convient  pas,  et  ne  ferait  point  sur  les  auditeurs  les  impressions  que 
I'etat  de  rhomme  demande." 

"D.   I.  208,  Adam    (3). 

•O.  D.  III.   10.  iii. 

'  D.  IV.  192,  Brutus  (2),  K:  ".  .  .  un  orateur  se  soucie  peu  que 
de  tels  faits  soient  certains :  il  se  contente  qu'une  partie  du  peuple  les 
croie."  Cf.  D.  IV.  492,  Cassius,  B;  D.  IX.  431,  Louis  XII,  D;  D.  X. 
356.  Mausole,  C. 

'O.  D.  III.  178;  cf.  D.  IV.  408,  Capisucchi  (2),  B ;  D.  V.  194.  Cimon, 
D;  D.  V.  285,  Conon  (2).  E;  D.  VI.  548,  Frangois.  E;  D.  IX.  333, 
Loyola,  X ;  D.  X.  393,  Melanchton,  O ;  O.  D.  I.  L.  118;  O.  D.  II.  109. 

"D.  IT.  135-7,  Antoine  (2),  B,  C. 

'"  O.  D.  I.  645,  vi. 


36  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

but  on  paper,  without  the  fire  and  enthusiasm  which  the 
preacher  has  put  into  it,  a  reader  is  apt  to  find  it  insipid." 
The  utterances  of  a  preacher  should  be  based  on  truth ;  they 
should  not  consist  of  exaggerations  which,  however  they  may 
glitter,  are  unreliable  and  misleading.^^  Bayle  protests  against 
subtleties  and  paradoxes  in  a  sermon. ^^  He  criticises  severely 
an  extreme  compliment  paid  Louis  XIV  in  a  sermon  by  the 
Abbe  Denise,  Chanoine  dc  Troycs;  it  may  have  been  brilliant 
and  effective,  but  it  was  only  an  amas  dc  fausscs  pcnsccs}*  It 
is  true  that  sometimes  Bayle  seems  to  accept  the  fact  that 
orators  pay  slight  attention  to  logic,  and  that  mathematical  rea- 
soning is  not  necessary  in  an  oration.  But  he  regrets  this  state 
of  affairs.^"  In  several  cases  where  he  does  find  solid  reasoning 
in  a  speech  he  indicates  his  approval.^^ 

Since  eloquence  makes  its  appeal  to  the  heart  rather  than  to 
the  brain,  an  orator  has  little  need  of  profound  scholarship.  As 
a  matter  of  fact  a  man  gifted  as  an  orator  is  not  apt  to  have 
the  talent  for  great  learning — but  his  weakness  in  this  particular 
does  not  matter.     Of  preachers  Bayle  says : 

le  but  des  Predicateurs  etant  de  toucher  leur  Auditoire.  et  de  le  tenir 
attentif,  ils  ont  plus  de  besoin  d'eloquence,  d'imagination,"  de  pensees 
probables  et  populaires,  d'ornemens  et  de  moralitez,  que  de  raisonnements 
profonds  et  solides  ...  ils  employent  tout  leur  temps  a  chercher 
les  finesses  de  I'eloquence  et     .      .      .     ils  renoncent  a  la  profonde  erudi- 


"O.  D.  I.  L.  86.  Cf.  D.  IV.  524,  Cassius  (7),  O,  on  the  difference 
"  entre  le  succes  d'une  harangue  recitee  et  le  succes  d'une  harangue 
publiee." 

'-0.  D.  II.  299. 

^'  O.  D.  I.  L.  86.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  56.  Note  that  Morus,  though  Bayle 
names  him  as  the  man  who  introduced  such  subtleties  into  sermons,  is 
given  credit  for  a  certain   adroitness. 

"O.   D.   II.  298-9,  iv. 

"  Cf.  O.  D.  II.  299:  "les  personnes  dc  bon  gout  souhaiteroient  pas- 
sionement  que  les  Predicateurs  se  pussent  guerir  une  bonne  fois  de  la 
maladie  de  mal  raisonner."  Cf.  D.  VI.  2<77'  Experiens,  A :  "  Les  logiciens 
se  servent  trop  de  I'art  du  distinguo :  les  orateurs  ne  s'en  servent  pas 
assez." 

"D.  VII.  124,  Gontaut,  C ;  D.  X.  408,  Mcstrczat.  F;   O.  D.   I.  500.  iv. 

"  Cf.  D.  I.  239,  Afer,  B :  Bayle  says  that,  since  orators  draw  so  heavily 
on  their  imagination,  they  should  retire  before  their  fire  is  exhausted. 
They  are  inclined,  however,  to  persist  in  their  activity  to  the  end.  Cf. 
supra,  p.  24    (of   the  imagination  of   poets). 


Oratory  3  7 

tion  qui  generalement  parlant  ne  leur  serviroit  pas  de  bcaucoup  en 
Chaire." 

Learning  ordinarily  makes  a  sermon  dr}'  and  diminishes  its 
grace  and  effectiveness.^"  On  the  other  hand  a  preacher  must 
have  a  grasp  of  the  essentials  in  things  erudite  and  theological ; 
otherwise  he  is  at  a  considerable  disadvantage  and  cannot  hope 
to  influence  his  audience.-''  Evidently  Bayle  believes  in  a  happy 
medium ;  a  preacher  need  not  be  a  savant,  but  he  must  have  a 
fairly  well  furnished  mind.-^ 

There  are  a  number  of  miscellaneous  criticisms  concerning 
various  details  of  oratory.  Some  languages  are  richer  than 
others  in  the  terms  and  expressions  which  an  orator  may  use  to 
good  effect.--  Eloquence  is  especially  developed  in  a  country 
where  there  exist  portentous  political  questions.-^  A  man  who 
has  a  good  memory  and  who  can  imitate  the  manners  of  some 
great  speaker  may  readily  make  himself  an  orator.-*  This  ques- 
tion of  manners,  of  delivery,  is  important.-^     The  personal  ap- 


"O.  D.  II.  297,  XX ;  cf.  D.  XII.  288-9,  Porcius.  U.  Here  Bayle  says: 
"  les  talens  de  I'eloquence  sont  pour  I'ordinaire  separes  de  la  vaste  erudi- 
tion."    He  refers  to  lawyers,  orators  and  preachers ;  cf .  O.  D.  II.  20. 

Cf.  D.  VII.  22,  Garasse :  Bayle  tells  how  Garasse  had  the  brilliancy 
and  power  of  imagination  which  made  him  a  good  orator,  but  was  unfitted 
for  writing,  especially  on  subjects  which  demand  dignity,  careful  reason- 
ing and   careful   scholarship. 

^*  O.  D.  II.  297,  XX :  '■  Un  homme  qui  a  beaucoup  d'esprit  et  de  juge- 
ment  se  pent  servir  aVec  avantage  de  la  science :  par  rapport  aux  Predica- 
tions, mais  pour  I'ordinaire  la  profonde  science  nuit  plus  a  un  Predicateur, 
qu'elle  ne  lui  sert." 

""  O.  D.  II.  299.  Bayle  remarks  on  the  injustice  of  the  common  people, 
who  are  prone  to  judge  a  sermon  poor  if  it  is  entirely  clear,  if  the 
preacher  does  not  put  in  a  few  remarks  which  are  too  deep  for  them. 

^  Cf.  D.  IV.  31-2,  Bouchin,  B:  Bayle  objects  to  the  attempt  on  the 
part  of  preachers  and  lawyers  to  display  learning  in  their  speeches.  He 
protests  against  the  former  practice  of  filling  a  sermon  or  a  plea  with 
allusions  to  literature,  to  the  ancients,  etc.  He  adds  that  modern  lawyers 
have  gone  to  the  opposite  extreme ;  their  erudition  is  too  slight. 

"O.  D.  I.  163-4. 

=^0.  D.  I.  113. 

"  D.  X.  596,  Musso,  B. 

**  D.  X.  596,  Musso,  C :  ''  Que  la  bonne  mine  est  un  favorable  pre- 
curseur  pour  celui  qui  parle  en  public!  elle  dispose  I'assemblee  a  bien 
ecouter,  elle  ebranle  les  suffrages  avant  qu'il  ouvre  la  bouche."     Cf.  D. 


38  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

pearance  of  an  orator,  and  his  voice,  may  make  or  mar  him. 
It  is  desirable  that  he  give  the  impression  of  speaking  readily 
and  freely,  without  long  preparation,  and  without  recourse  to 
the  little  tricks  of  the  profession.-*^  In  other  words,  let  him 
seem  easy  and  frank.  A  skillful  orator  will  know  how  to 
attack  an  opponent  at  a  weak  point,  and  will  make  use  of  every 
chance  to  exercise  his  power  of  satire.^'  In  the  pulpit  a  serious 
and  dignified  tone  is  to  be  insisted  upon.^*  Bayle  speaks  of  the 
dignified  utterances  which  the  Huguenots  demand  in  the  pulpit, 
and  adds : 

Ceux  de  la  religion  ne  font  nul  cas  de  ces  ornemens  mondains,  et  de 
cette  rhetorique  effeminee  dont  les  predicateurs  de  I'autre  parti  se  parent.^ 

A  preacher  should  stick  to  his  text.  It  is  possible  to  please  a 
congregation  by  shifting  from  one  subject  to  another  and  intro- 
ducing clever  ideas  which  the  variety  of  topics  suggests.  There 
are  many  who  like  such  a  sermon — but  it  is  poor  taste. ^*^'  Bayle 
praises  the  text  of  a  funeral  oration  of  I'Abbc  de  la  Chamhre 
for  its  simplicity  and  epigrammatic  force. ^^  He  does  not  have 
much  to  say  about  funeral  orations  in  general,  but  refers  to 
the  fact  that  the  fair  words  of  commendation  on  such  occa- 
sions are  apt  to  be  unreliable, •'*-  and  makes  the  following 
comment  on  the  practice  of  giving  a  full  account  of  the  last 
illness  of  the  deceased: 

dans  les  oraisons  funebres  des  professeurs,  on  volt  ordinairement  une 
description  fort  exacte  de  tous  les  symptomes  de  leur  derniere  maladie ; 
si  un  tel  jour  ils  suerent,  s'ils  furent  constipes  ou  presses  d'un  diarrhee. 
etc.»» 


IV.  4,  Bosc  (3);  D.  VIII.  43,  Henry  III.  P;  D.  VIII.  222.  Hortensius 
(2),  K;  D.  X.  562,  Morus,  I;  D.  XI.  592-3,  Pericles.  D. 

="0.  II.  137,  Antoine  (2),  D. 

^D.  VI.  616,  Fulvie  (2),  F;  cf.  ibid,  623.  L. 

"*  D.  III.  121,  Barlette ;  O.  D.  II.  23,  29.  Note  that  in  each  of  these 
three  passages  there  is  a  suggestion  of  an  argument  dc  circonstance. 

=*D.  V.  229,  Claude  (2),  G. 

""O.  D.  III.  517. 

''  O.  D.  I.  188,  viii. 

"'D.  III.  413,  Beze,  v;  D.  IX.  405,  Louis  XI.  F. 

•*D.  XI.  439,  Pasor,  C.  Cf.  D.  I.  175.  Acidalius.  C:  "II  n'y  a  peut- 
etrc  rien  sur  quoi  la  fabuleuse  renommee  debite  plus  de  mensongcs  que 
sur  les  maladies  et  sur  la  mort  des  hommes  illustres :  c'est  pourquoi  les 
predicateurs.  ct  en  general  tons  les  moralistcs,  devraient  otrc  extrenienicnt 
reserves  a  faire  des  reflexions  la-dessus." 


VI 
HISTORY 

History,  with  Rayle,  is  quite  a  different  thing  from  poetry 
and  fiction  and  other  light  hterature.  When  he  talks  about 
history  his  tone  is  grave.  He  discusses  earnestly  the  needs  of 
the  genre  and  advocates  high  ideals. 

Certain  comments  throw  light  on  his  general  conception  of 
history.  A  bare  narration  of  external  facts  is  by  no  means  sat- 
isfactory. It  is  important  to  get  at  the  causes  which  underlie 
various  historical  events,  to  comprehend  the  motives  which 
impel  the  various  actors.  A  history  which  takes  these  factors 
into  account  is  not  only  more  pleasing,  more  interesting,  but 
also  more  instructive : 

il  est  mille  fois  plus  avantageux  en  lisant  I'Histoire  d'acquerir  ce  dis- 
cernement  sans  se  charger  que  d'un  petit  nombre  de  faits,  que  de  se 
remplir  d'un  nombre  innombralile  d'evenemens  et  de  noms,  sans  bien 
penetrer  la  cause  de  chaque  chose.^ 

Care,  indeed,  is  necessary  in  analysing  the  thoughts  of  historical 
characters.  If  a  historian  occupies  himself  with  such  questions, 
he  must  limit  his  assertions  to  what  can  be  shown  to  be  probable, 
and  he  must  specify  clearly  that  he  is  only  presenting  his  ow^n 
inferences.-  Furthermore  he  must  not  impute  to  his  character 
his  own  thoughts  and  passions.^     And  he  must  be  sure  that  he 

'O.  D.  I.  148.  viii.  Cf.  D.  XIV.  104-5.  Theopompe.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  32; 
cf.  the  reference  to  this  article  of  the  Noiivelles  in  Gigas,  691.  J.  Le 
Clerc,  note  i ;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  33. 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  28:  Bayle  commends  Maimbourg's  account  of  the  causes 
of  the  Ligue  and  says:  "En  lisant  ces  choses  le  Lecteur  devine  presque 
par  avance  ce  qu'il  va  lire,  et  c'est  la  le  grand  secret  d'un  Historien ;  il 
faut  qu'il  prepare  I'esprit  aux  evenemens,  mais  il  ne  lui  est  pas  permis 
pour  cela  de  preter  a  ceux  dont  il  parle,  toutes  les  passions  et  toutes  les 
reflexions  qu'il  imagine  dans  son  cabinet.  On  ne  sgauroit  assez  blamer 
la  license  que  les  Italiens  se   sont  donnee  a  cet  egard." 

'  D.  X.  603,  Musurus.  D.     Bayle  criticises  Varillas  on  this  point. 

'Cf.  supra,  n.  i,  ref.  to  O.  D.  I.  28.  Cf.  also  O.  D.  II.  527:  "  Quel- 
quefois  un  Roman  semble  plus  vraisemblable  que  I'Histoire  la  plus  sin- 


40  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

has  the  facts  straight ;  otherwise  he  may  work  cut  a  clever 
analysis  on  a  false  basis.*  But  attention  to  underlying  causes, 
provided  these  precautions  are  taken,  is  valuable.  Here,  then, 
is  part  of  Bayle's  definition  of  history :  a  record  of  human 
events,  but  not  a  mere  chronicle,  for  it  must  deal  not  only  with 
results  but  with  causes. 

Another  remark  explains  still  further  Bayle's  conception.  A 
historian  does  well,  he  says,  not  to  attempt  to  write  about  a 
period  which  has  already  been  treated  by  many  authors.'  If 
he  has  discovered  a  few  new  facts  he  had  better  publish  them 
separately,  rather  than  incorporate  them  in  a  general  work 
which  would  repeat  a  thousand  details  already  known.  New 
histories  on  time-worn  subjects  displease  the  public.  He  who 
undertakes  such  a  work  copies  others  and  is  open  to  the  accusa- 
tion of  plagiarism ;  he  gets  little  glory  for  making  a  good  copy 
and  he  exposes  himself  to  sharp  criticism  when  his  work  is 
compared  with  the  previous  writings.  There  may,  indeed,  be 
particular  instances  where  a  writer  is  justified  in  reworking  a 
much  treated  subject.    If  he  has  new  material  with  an  important 

cere,  et  rien  quelquefois  ne  nous  semble  plus  naif,  et  plus  assure,  que 
les  motifs  qu'un  Historien  fait  avoir  aux  Princes,  lesquels  motifs  ne 
sont  qu'une  fiction  de  I'Historien  tres-eloignee  de  la  verite,  laquelle, 
s'il  I'avoit  raporte  fidelement,  les  Lecteurs  eussent  trouvee  quelquefois 
plate,  absurde,   contraire   a  toute   vraisemblance  et  raison." 

*  D.  VI.  309,  Etampes  (2),  K.  Bayle  criticises  Varillas  on  this  point. 
Cf.  D.  XV.  176,  Dissert,  sur  les  Libelles  Diff.,  A.  Bayle  is  speaking  of 
a  certain  class  of  historians  who  take  particular  pleasure  in  prying  out 
new  bits  of  information.  "  lis  aiment  a  dire  ce  qui  ne  se  trouve  point 
dans  les  histoires  ordinaires :  ils  aspirent  a  la  louange  d'avoir  deterre 
des  anecdotes,  et  les  qualites  occultes  des  premiers  ministres,  avec  le 
secret  des  intrigues,  et  des  negociations  que  personne  n'avait  su.  Qu'une 
chose  ait  ete  abandonnee  a  I'oubli  de  tout  le  monde,  c'est  assez  pour 
eux  afin  de  la  publier.  Ils  vont  plus  avant ;  ils  batissent  la-dessus  tout 
un  systeme :  cela  leur  sert  de  clef  pour  ouvrir  le  cabinet  des  souverains ; 
ils  donnent  raison  par-la  de  plusieurs  mysteres,  si  on  les  en  croit."  The 
zeal  of  such  writers  in  getting  hold  of  these  details  is  praiseworthy 
enough,  but  their  readiness  to  accept  the  information  as  reliable  is  to  be 
deplored.      Bayle  refers  to  Varillas  as  a  historian  of  this  kind. 

"  O.  D.  III.  1023,  iv.  Note  that  in  this  case  Bayle  refers  to  the  reign 
of  Henri  IV,  and  seems  quite  satisfied  with  the  works  on  that  period 
already  written.  He  names,  as  historians  of  the  period,  Julien  Peleus, 
Pierre  Mathieu,  Baptiste  le  Grain.  Scipion  Du-pleix,  Mezerai,  etc.  Cf. 
D.  VII.  465-6.  Hainan,  E. 


History  4 1 

bearing  upon  the  events  of  a  period,  it  is  quite  right  fur  him 
to  embody  his  discoveries  in  a  fresh  history  of  the  whole  period. 
And  a  writer  does  real  service  to  the  public  when  he  gathers  in 
a  general  account  of  an  epoch  historical  facts,  already  known, 
but  scattered  in  various  books,  or  when  he  writes  of  an  age 
which  is  described  only  in  archaic  works,  for  whose  style  the 
public  has  no  liking.  In  general,  however,  Bayle  would  say 
that  there  is  no  justification  for  composing  a  history  of  events 
which  have  already  been  carefully  described.  He  evidently 
looks  on  history  as  a  collection  of  facts,  not  merely  the  externals 
which  first  strike  the  attention,  but  nevertheless  facts,  of  the 
kind  that  can  be  put  on  record,  once  and  for  all  time.  It  does 
not  seem  to  occur  to  him  that  a  new  historian,  big  in  brains 
and  imagination,  might  do  much  to  illuminate  the  history'  of  a 
period  of  which  the  "  facts  "  are  already  known  in  great  detail. 
There  is  little  in  Bayle's  comments  to  indicate  that  he  had 
any  definite  notion  of  what  the  lessons  of  history  might  be, 
of  the  use  man  might  make  of  the  records  of  the  past.'^  He 
is  particularly  impressed  with  the  fact  that,  on  account  of  the 
general  corruption  of  man,  a  history  which  contains  a  faithful 
narration  of  events  is  bound  to  take  on  the  appearance  of  a 
satire  against  the  human  race,"  and  he  grants  that  a  waiter  may 
safely  venture  a  few  personal  comments  on  this  general  cor- 
ruption which  he  presents.^  Yet  the  historian  must  be  sparing 
with   such  remarks. 

II  suffit  done  de  bien  exposer  les  faits :  les  sentences  en  ce  genre-la  doivent 
etre  menagees  tout  comme  celles  qu'on  nomme  maximes :  elles  ne  doivent 
pas  se  montrer  hors  d'ceuvres  ou  en  relief,  11  faut  les  incorporer  dans 
la  narration,  comme  on  I'a  dit  ci-dessus." 

Bayle  objects  especially  to  authors  who  introduce  puerile 
moral    reflections    in    connection    with    events.^*'      In    one    case 


"Cf.  supra,  p.  39,  n.  i.  ref.  to  O.  D.  I.  32,  O.  D.  I.  148. 

'  D.  IV.  181,  Bruschius,  D ;  cf .  D.  X.  196-7,  Manicheens,  D :  "  L'Histoire 
n'est  a  proprement  parler  qu'un  recueil  des  crimes  et  des  infortunes  du 
genre  humain."  Histor}^  contains  some  examples  of  virtue,  however, 
Bayle  admits  here;  cf.  D.  XI.  270,  Orose,  G;  D.  XI.  324,   Padilla.  E. 

'D.  IV.   181,  Bruschius,  D. 

•D.  XIV.  175-6,  Timee,  L;  cf.  D.  XIV.  104,  Theon,  C. 

"  O.  D.  III.  II,  vi :  "  ils  (historians)  poussent  quelquefois  si  loin  la 
moralite  qu'un  Lecteur  mal  satisfait  de  les  voir  interrompre  le  fil  de 
I'Histoire,   leur  diroit  volontiers,  s'il  les  tenoit,   '  riservate  questo   per  la 


42  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

Bayle  sees  that  History  may  present  a  certain  useful 
example :  an  account  of  the  horrors  of  the  religious  wars 
in  France  in  the  sixteenth  century  may  be  valuable  in 
warning  posterity  to  refrain  from  such  atrocities.^  ^  But 
elsewhere  he  suggests  that  the  example  drawn  from  history 
depends  much  on  the  prejudice  of  the  reader.  In  regard  to 
the  records  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans  which  show  their  love 
for  liberty  and  their  hatred  of  monarchs,  Bayle  says  the  influ- 
ence of  these  books  works  in  two  directions :  devotees  of 
democracy  will  find  splendid  examples  of  the  virtue  of  a  love 
for  liberty ;  those  who  believe  in  monarchical  government  will 
point  out  the  conspiracies  and  political  upsets  which  attended 
the  efforts  of  the  ancients,  and  will  see  therein  a  proof  of  the 
justice  of  their  opinion.^-  In  a  word,  then,  Bayle  does  not 
emphasize  the  significance  of  the  instruction  which  history  may 
be  able  to  give.  His  interest  seems,  to  some  extent,  the  interest 
of  a  savant  who  gathers  facts  for  the  love  of  having  them. 
It  is  granted  that  history  writing  is  difficult,  more  difficult 
perhaps  than  any  other  task  which  an  author  might  under- 
take.^^   The  best  historians  are  perplexed  by  the  difficulties  they 


predica.'  "  Cf.  O.  D.  III.  192,  ii :  "  lis  (some  historians)  feroient  bien 
d'en  oter  (from  their  books)  tant  de  reflexions  devotes  que  Ton  y  a 
repandues,  et  qui  auroient  dii  etre  reservees  pour  des  sermons,  ou  pour 
des  Livres  de  piete." 

Cf.  O.  D.  II.  84:  Bayle  refers  to  a  comment  of  Maimbourg  on  the 
downfall  of  the  Prince  de  Conde  as  a  sign  of  God's  wrath  against  those 
who  oppose  the  Roman  Church.  His  attitude  is  distinctly  partisan  here, 
and  he  refers  not  only  to  froidcs  moralitcz  but  to  z'ains  orncmcns  de 
pensees  fausses. 

"  D.  X.  35-7,  Macon.  C.  Although  Bayle  grants  here  that  "  ceux  qui 
semblcnt  trouver  mauvais  que  Ton  fasse  des  histoires.  parce,  disent-ils, 
qu'elles  n'apprenent  aux  lecteurs  que  toutes  sortes  de  crimes,  ont  a 
certains  egards  beaucoup  de  raison  par  rapport  a  I'histoire  des  guerres 
sacrees."  Cf.  also  D.  XIII.  273,  Sforce  (3),  E:  In  speaking  of  a  his- 
torian who  left  out  a  detail  which  brought  discredit  to  Catherine  Sforza, 
Bayle  says:  "  Et  si  tous  les  historiens  imitaient  celui  dont  je  vous  parle," 
n'6terait-on  pas  aux  hommes  la  crainte  de  la  posterite,  frein  tres-puissant 
pour  les  contenir  dans  Icur  devoir,  et  I'un  des  principaux  fruits  de 
I'histoire?" 

"D.  VIII.    161,   Hobbes,    C. 

"■D.  XII.    504,  Rcmond,   D. 


History  43 

encounter,  and  make  mistakes.'*  It  is  no  wonder  that  people 
insist  on  the  uncertainty  of  liistory,  on  tlie  unreliability  of  what 
are  supposed  to  be  historical  facts.  Yet  Bayle  is  inclined  to 
object  to  the  extremes  to  which  some  go  in  proclaiming  this. 
He  is  willing  to  accept  the  testimony  of  serious,  careful  his- 
torians, although  he  objects  to  doubtful  evidence: 

selon  les  lois  publiques,  en  fait  de  lecture  d'histoire,  on  regoit  pour  bon 
ce  qui  se  prouve  par  le  temoignage  des  auteurs  graves,  et  Ton  rejette 
comme  une  fable  tout  ce  qu'un  moderne  debite  concernant  I'antiquite, 
sans  I'avoir  lu  dans  de  bons  historiens." 

Of  a  writer  who  carried  Ic  pyrrhonismc  historiquc  to  excess  it 
is  suggested  that  he  deserves  to  be  classed  with  that  doubter 
who  was  sure  that  all  Caesar  had  to  say  in  his  Commentaries 
about  the  Gallic  Wars  is  false  and  that  Caesar  never  reached 
the  other  side  of  the  Alps.'^  Bayle  thinks  the  uncertainty  of 
history  may  be  overcome  to  an  appreciable  extent.'"  Here 
and  there  in  his  writings  he  takes  up  questions  of  impartiality, 
accuracy,  and  style,  in  historical  composition,  he  indicates  some 
of  the  difficulties  in  detail,  and  urges  that  they  be  met  and 
conquered. 

Partiality  is  common  in  the  writings  of  historians.  Events 
are  described  from  the  personal  point  of  view  of  the  author, 
and  he  allows  his  individual  prejudices  to  sway  him.  Bayle 
dwells  especially  on  the  one-sidedness  of  those  who  write  of  the 
Reformation  and  of  Protestantism,  but  he  does  not  claim  that 
the  Catholics  alone  are  at  fault  in  this  case;  he  admits  that  both 
sides  err.  It  is  an  easy  matter  so  to  shift  the  details  of  history 
as  to  produce  the  effect  which  the  spite  or  passion  of  the  writer 
makes  him  desire.  A  slight  change  in  word  order,  the  neglect 
or  the  addition  of  some  petty  incident,  can  make  or  destroy  the 


'*  D  X.  518.  iMopsus,  E;  D.  XI.  90,  Navarre  (3).  H:  les  mcilleurcs  liis- 
toircs  )WHS  tro)nt>ent — note  that  Bayle  refers  in  this  case  to  Brantome 
and  Mezerai. 

"D.   VII.   324,   Guevara,   D. 

"Cf.  D.  XV.  241.  Dissert,  cont.  le  Projct,  IX.  Bayle  states  that  many 
historical  problems  can  be  solved  with  full  certainty.  He  is  here  point- 
ing out  the  difference  between  historical  and  mathematical-metaphysical 
truth.  Note  the  following:  "  ce  serait  .  .  .  passer  d'un  genre  de 
choses  a  un  autre,  que  de  demander  que  Ton  prouvat  non-seulement  qu'il 
a  paru  a  toute  I'Europe  qu'il  se  donna  une  sanglante  bataille  a   Senef, 


44  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

reputation  of  a  historical  personage.^"  Bayle  states  that  he  reads 
the  accounts  of  the  Catholics  and  Protestants,  not  in  the  hope 
of  getting  at  the  actual  facts,  but  merely  from  a  desire  to  find 
out  what  each  side  has  to  say  and  to  discover  what  particular 
prejudices  prompt  each  writer.^®  He  also  comments  many  times 
on  the  partiality  of  historians  who  deal  with  political  subjects, 
where  there  is  no  suggestion  of  religious  differences.  Flattery 
and  vituperation  abound.  A  history  is  frequently  written  for 
the  sole  purpose  of  venting  personal  malice.  The  author  of  such 
a  work  does  not  wait  until  his  anger  has  cooled,  so  as  to  write 
a  fair  account ;  he  composes  while  his  passions  are  still  aroused, 
persuaded,  perhaps,  that  his  anger  will  give  him  the  talent  for 
writing  which  he  ordinarily  lacks. ^'^ 

It  is  indeed  hard,  to  avoid  being  partial  in  writing  a  history. 

Je  ne  pretends  pas  qu'il  soit  facile  de  composer  une  histoire  qui  repre- 
sente  avec  une   egale   sincerite   les   fautes   et   la   prudence,    le    tort   et  le 


I'an  1674;  mais  aussi  que  les  objets  sont  tels  hors  de  notre  esprit,  qu'ils 
nous  paraissent." 

"  O.  D.  II.  10.  Apropos  of  Maimbourg's  Histoire  du  Cakinisme.  Cf. 
O.   D.   I.   516. 

"O.  D.  II.  10-12.  Bayle  grants  the  possibility  of  some  degree  of  cer- 
tainty in  the  case  of  such  histories.  A  fact  may  be  accepted  which  both 
sides  agree  to,  however  it  affects  the  credit  of  either.  Discernment  in 
weighing  the  evidence  may  also  be  of  use.  But  this  is  no  eas)'  matter, 
for  a  clever  historian  can  make  the  evidence,  as  he  presents  it,  seem 
convincing.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  462;  O.  D.  I.  510,  iv :  .  .  .  "' L'Histoire, 
qui  est,  a  proprement  parler,  comme  ces  tableaux  et  ces  Medailles,  ou 
Ton  ne  cherche  pas  la  ressemblance,  mais  I'habilite  de  I'Ouvrier." 

"D.  XIV.   175,  Timee,  L. 

For  passing  remarks  on  the  partiality  of  historians,  cf.  D.  III.  258, 
Bellai  (2),  F;  D.  III.  530,  Boleyn.  B;  D.  IV.  429,  Capriata.  D;  D.  V. 
70,  Charles-Quint,  I;  D.  V.  120,  Chatel  (2),  C;  D.  VI.  103.  Eginhart; 
D.  VI.  323,  Eudes,  B ;  D.  X.  107,  Mahomet  II.  D;  D.  X.  114.  Mahomet 
II,  X;  D.  XIV.  112.  Theopompe,  H;  O.  D.  I.  202,  iv;  Gigas.  81  (ci. 
supra,  p.  28,  n.  4,  the  ref.  to  the  letter  published  by  Gigas,  74-85). 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  510:  "  Voila,  on  peu  s'cn  faut,  le  sort  de  I'Histoire ;  chaque 
nation,  chaque  Religion,  chaque  Sccte  prend  les  memcs  faits  tout  cruds 
ou  ils  se  peuvent  trouver,  les  accommode  et  les  assaisonne  selon  son  gout, 
et  puis  ils  semblent  a  chaque  Lecteur  vrais  ou  faux,  selon  qu'ils  con- 
vienncnt,  ou   qu'ils  repugncnt  a  ses   prejugez." 

Cf.  D.  XV.  186-7,  Dissert,  sur  les  Libellcs  Diff.,  E:  "comme  ce  qui 
est  orthodoxie  dans  une  religion  est  une  heresie  dans  une  autre,  ce  qui 
est  une  bataille  gagnce  dans  les  historicns  d'une  nation  est  une  bataille 


History  45 

droit,  Ics  pertes  et  Ics  avantagcs,  des  deux  partis.  II  faiulrait  ctre  riiomme 
sans  passions  011  le  sage  des  stoiqucs,  cct  honime  qu'on  ne  trouvera 
jamais,  et  qui  ne  suhsiste  qu'en  idee;  il  faudrait,  dis-je,  parvcnir  a  cette 
indolence,  si  Ton  voulait  s'assurcr  que  Ton  tiendra  toujours  ce  juste 
milieu   en  ecrivant  unc  histoire."" 

For  example,  a  man  who  would  write  of  the  great  Protestant 
Reformation  has  a  complicated  task  on  his  hands  and  must  make 
a  special  effort  to  escape  religious  prejudice,  otherwise  he  has 
no  right  to  undertake  such  an  enterprise.  Bayle  states  that  there 
are  some  who  wish  that  such  a  history  might  be  written,  not 
by  a  Protestant  or  a  Catholic,  but  by  a  pagan  like  Thucydides 
or  Livy,  who  could  have  looked  on  the  whole  matter  from  a 
neutral  point  of  view  and  who  could  have  estimated  justly 
the  merits  of  each  party.  He  adds  that  here  too  he  doubts 
whether  impartiality  could  be  secured,  for  Catholicism  is  more 
like  the  religion  of  the  pagans  than  Protestantism  and  that  might 
have  prejudiced  these  writers.-^  It  is  hard  for  a  historian  to 
get  away  from  his  predilections  even  in  cases  where  there  would 
seem  to  be  no  occasion  for  personal  likes  and  dislikes  to  enter. 
Suppose  that  a  historian  should  give  an  account  of  some  Indian 
king  who  had  been  dethroned  and  who  died  hundreds  of  years 
ago.  The  subject  would  seem  too  remote  to  affect  the  personal 
sentiments  of  the  author  in  any  way.  Yet  he  may  be  an  enemy 
to  monarchical  government,  and  in  that  case  he  will  not  fail 
to  shift  his  facts  so  as  to  present  the  deposed  king  in  an  odious 
light.  Or  if  he  has  the  opposite  political  leanings,  he  will  write 
his  history  accordingly.  Again,  a  historian  is  led  to  take  advan- 
tage of  such  a  subject  to  indulge  in  criticism  of  his  contempor- 
aries, under  the  names  of  the  historical  characters  dealt  with.-^ 
Yet  whatever  difficulties  stand  in  the  way  of  impartiality, 
Bayle  is  inclined  to  insist  on  it  as  the  prime  requisite  for  a 
historian.  He  deplores  the  practice  of  those  who,  when  they 
inquire  into  the  merits  of  a  history,  seek  information  about  the 
judgment,  the  intelligence,  and  the  style  of  the  author,  rather 


perdue  dans  les  historiens  de  I'autre  parti.      C'est  un  abus  fort  ancien,  et 
a  quoi  Ton  ne  voit  pas  de  remede." 

'"D.  IV.  427,  Capriata,   C. 

^D.  XII.   505,  Remond,  D. 

"D.  XII.  505-6,  Remond,   D. 


46  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

than  about  his  honesty.  A  historian  must  subject  himself  to  a 
rigid  adherence  to  the  demands  of  integrity : 

il  faut  avoir  la  conscience  si  ennemie  du  mensonge,  qu'elle  ne  vous 
permette  pas  de  mentir,  non  pas  meme  a  I'avantage  de  votre  religion, 
et  de  vos  plus  tendres  amis,  ni  au  desavantage  d'une  secte  impie  et  de 
vos  plus  implacables  persecuteurs.  J'entends  par  mentir  non-seulement 
I'invention  entiere  d'un  fait  faux,  mais  aussi  la  suppression  ou  I'addition 
de  certaines  circonstances  qui  peuvent  servir  ou  a  disculper  les  gens  ou 
a  les   charger.^^ 

The  duties  of  a  historian  are  not  unlike  those  of  a  judge.  The 
judge  must  not  let  any  prejudice  of  his  own  weigh  in  the  decision 
of  a  case ;  it  would  be  eminently  unfair  for  him  to  favor  some 
particular  culprit  because  he  was  under  personal  obligations  to 
the  man.  Similarly  a  historian  must  be  bound  by  no  such  ties. 
It  is  wrong  to  expect  that  he  should  deal  gently  with  the  weak- 
nesses of  some  public  character  merely  because  that  individual 
has  been  his  benefactor.^* 

In  the  deplorable  partiality  which  historians  show,  Bayle  sees 
one  of  the  reasons  for  the  unreliability  of  historical  narrative, 
for  the  confusion  which  prevails  concerning  details  of  events.-' 


='D.  XII.  506-7,  Remond,  D;  cf.  D.  VII.  468,  Haillan,  G;  D.  VII. 
490-1,  Hall   (2),  B;  D.  XIV.  516,  Usson,  F;  O.  D.  IV.  863. 

Cf.  also  O.  D.  IV.  750:  "  Le  comble  de  la  gloire  pour  un  Historien,  c'est 
de  faire  justice  a  ses  plus  grands  ennemis ;"  D.  XII.  504,  Remond,  D : 
Bayle  says  a  historian  must  have :  "  une  conscience  droite,  une  probite 
achevee,  .  .  .  et,  sur  toutes  choses,  la  force  de  resister  aux  instincts 
du  zele  de  religion  qui  sollicitent  a  decrier  ce  qu'on  juge  faux,  et  a 
orner  ce  qu'on  juge  veritable."  This  remark  is  made  apropos  of  a 
History  of  the  Reformation  by  Remond.  The  attack  which  Bayle  makes 
here  is  unjust,  according  to  Le  Clerc  and  Joly  (cf.  footnote  2,  page  506). 

Cf.  D.  III.  194,  Baudouin,  A :  on  Moreri's  account  of  Baudouin :  "  Ou 
est  done  la  bonne  foi  historique,  et  la  nettete  de  recit,  qui  demandent 
que  quand  tous  les  autres  livres  du  monde  seraient  brules.  la  seule  histoire 
d'un  homme  apprit  clairement  a  tous  les  lectcurs  s'il  a  dit  ou  s'il  a  fait 
une  telle  chose?" 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  520-1 1  "  II  est  sur  que  plus  on  se  peut  defaire  do  I'esprit 
de  ses  prejugez,  quand  on  prend  la  plume  pour  faire  une  histoire.  plus 
on  se  rend  propre  a  bien  soutenir  son  personnage."  O.  D.  III.  65: 
against  the  bigotry  of  Pellisson  in  writing  a  history  of   Louis  XI^^ 

"  D.  XIV.  517,  Usson,  F. 

'"Cf.  D.  I.  77,  Abimelech,  C;  D.  V.  275,  Concini,  G;  O.  D.  II.  14, 
ii;  O.  D.  III.  732;  O.  D.  II.  53:    Here  Bayle  is  speaking  of  the  differ- 


History  47 

Even  the  evidence  of  monuments,  inscriptions  and  medals 
becomes  uncertain,  since  partisan  writers  dare  to  falsify  such 
testimony  to  suit  their  needs.-"^  Bayle  speaks  with  particular 
acerbity  of  the  juggling  with  truth  and  the  chaos  which  results 
in  the  case  of  so-called  historians  who  describe  contemporaneous 
happenings.  Often,  for  political  reasons,  they  write  false 
accounts,  spreading  them  far  and  wide,  and  later,  when  the 
motives  for  dissimulation  are  no  longer  in  force,  no  one  is 
sufficiently  interested  to  rectify  these  narratives.  Or  if  there 
is  an  attempt  to  correct  the  errors,  it  is  apt  to  be  too  late ;  the 
false  account  has  already  too  strong  a  hold.-'  The  dishonesty 
of  those  who  compose  such  stories  is  criminal. 

Ce  n'est  pas  assez  que  de  comparer  ces  indignes  ecrivains  a  des  harpies, 
qui  salissent  tout  ce  qu'elles  touchent:  on  peut  dire  que  ce  sont  des 
bourreaux  qui  tordent  le  ecu,  les  bras  et  les  jambes  aux  faits  historiques, 
et  meme  qui  les  leur  coupent  quelquefois,  et  leur  en  appliquent  des 
postiches ;  et  cela  presque  au  moment  meme  qu'un  evenement  est  sorti 
du  sein  de  ses  causes,  et  que  les  exploits  d'une  bataille  ne  font  que  de 
naitre     . 

L'on  a  dit  autrefois  des  Muses  qu'elles  se  prostituaient  meme  a  des 
esclaves ;  c'est  ce  qu'on  peut  dire  principalement  de  celle  qui  preside  a 
I'Histoire :  c'est  un  veritable    '  scortum  triobolare,'  qui    se    tient    sur    les 


ences  of  Protestants  and  Catholics,  and  his  attitude  is  distinctly  partisan; 
O.  D.  III.  219,  xxii :  Bayle's  remark  in  this  case  closes  an  argument 
de  circonstance. 

^  D.  IV.  21,  Botero.  C.  Apropos  of  a  picture  which  was  published  as 
a  faithful  representation  of  a  certain  triumphal  column  which  the  pope 
Clement  VIII  erected,  a  colunm  which,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  never  existed, 
Bayle  says :  "  Et  quand  on  se  voit  attrape  par  la  montre  de  ces  pretendus 
monumens  publics,  on  ne  sait  plus  a  qui  se  fier :  on  ne  sait  si  les  medailles, 
si  les  inscriptions,  si  tels  autres  monumens,  sont  plus  sinceres  qu'un 
historien  a  gages  et  a  pension  annuelle ;  et  voila  une  confirmation  du 
pyrrhonisme  historique." 

Cf.  D.  XV.  160,  Dissert,  sur  les  Libelles  Diff.,  IX:  '"Car  si  I'antiquite 
greque,  romaine,  persane,  carthaginoise,  etc.,  en  avait  use  comme  Ton  en 
use  anjourd'hui.  ils  auraient  bien  de  la  peine  a  nous  prouver  quelque 
chose,  en  se  fortifiant  meme  div  secours  des  inscriptions  et  des  medailles, 
monumens  que  les  modernes  emploient  impunement  pour  satisfaire  leurs 
caprices,  sans  se  fonder  sur  un  fait  reel." 

''Cf.  D.  XV.  188,  Dissert,  sur  les  Libelles  Diff.,  G.  Bayle  speaks  of 
the  need  of  refuting  satires  and  libels  in  cases  when  they  have  been 
given  some  credence  as  history. 


48  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

grands  chemins,  et  qui  se  livre  au  premier  venu  pour  un  morceau  de 
pain.^ 

It  is  well  that  printing  is  only  a  modern  invention,  for  had  the 
ancients  possessed  this  means  doubtless  there  would  be  the  same 
multitude  of  varied  accounts  which  makes  modern  history  so 
confused.-" 

Contemporary  writers  not  only  say  things  which  are  false,  but 
they  leave  out  things  which  are  true.  It  sometimes  happens 
that  an  unusual  fact  is  not  put  on  record  until  long  after  the 
event  happened,  and  then  only  in  a  single  account.^"  Bayle 
suggests  that  the  omission  may  be  intentional  and  that  again 
partiality  may  be  at  the  root  of  this  evil.^^    He  adds  that  there 


''  D.  XV.  158,  Dissert,  sur  les  Libelles  Diff.,  VIII ;  cf.  all  of  sections 
VIII  and  IX  in  this  reference. 

^*  Ba3'le  comments  on  the  respect  which  the  ancients  showed  for  the 
dignity  of  history,  in  not  allowing  history  to  be  written  except  by  those 
who  were  equipped  by  their  birth  and  merit;  cf.  D.  XV.  159.  History, 
he  says,  should  be  written  by  those  whom  the  state  chooses,  not  by  any 
petty  chroniclers;  cf.  D.  XV.  157;  O.  D.  I.  261,  vii.  He  mentions  the 
multitude  of  historical  writers  in  his  own  day;  '' Lucien,  sans  le  savoir, 
a  fait  la  peinture  de  notre  siecle,  lorsqui'il  a  parle  d'une  guerre  qui 
avait  produit  un  si  grand  nombre  d'historiens,  qu'on  aurait  dit  que  ce 
metier  etait  a  la  mode;  "  D.  XV.  159. 

The  gazettes,  says  Bayle,  add  much  to  the  confusion  of  modern  history. 
For  the  various  journalistic  publications  of  his  own  day  which  deal  with 
current  events  he  has  little  sympathy.  Although  in  one  place  he  says 
in  reference  to  gazettes:  "  C'est  une  lecture  qui  n'est  pas  inutile"  (O.  D. 
I.  L.  117,  Ixxiii.)  and  although  elsewhere  he  grants  that  it  may  be  worth 
while  to  consult  them  on  account  of  the  public  documents  reproduced 
by  them  (O.  D.  HI.  590-2,  xlvii.),  and  on  account  of  the  dates  given, 
which  are  usually  accurate  (O.  D.  HI.  591,  xlvii;  O.  D.  I.  338,  i.),  yet 
he  feels  partiality  dominates  in  these  pieces,  battles  are  reported  won 
or  lost  according  to  the  partisan  interest  of  the  writer,  and  the  historian 
seeking  information  finds  little  on  which  he  may  rely  (D.  I.  31,  Abderame, 
G;  D.  I.  253,  Agesilaus  (2)  ;  D.  II.  161,  Apafi,  D;  D.  VII.  330,  Guicciardin, 
B;  D.  XV.  179,  Dissert,  sur  les  Libelles  Diff.,  B ;  O.  D.  I.  338.  i :  O.  D. 
I.  L.  169,  cxxiii;  O.  D.  II.  13,  iii ;  O.  D.  III.  732.  ii ;  Gigas.  13-14, 
18-29,  72-4).  The  candor  of  the  Romans,  who  admitted  the  victories  of 
Hannibal,  brings  out  by  striking  contrast  the  duplicity  of  these  moderns 
(Gigas,  21-2,  28-9).  For  a  characterization  of  three  particular  gazettes 
cf.  O.  D.  IV.  595,  xliv;  on  the  gazettes  of  Holland  cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  175, 
cxxxi. 

""D.   IV.  50s.  Cassius   (4),  H. 

"  Cf.   D.  I.  459,   Alpaide,   B.     Bayle  suggests  that  the  silence  of  con- 


History  49 

are,  however,  cases  where  contemporary  writers  could  not  sup- 
press certain  facts  with  any  hoi)e  of  keeping  them  from  the 
knowledge  of  the  world,  and,  on  that  account,  cases  where  the 
silence  of  contemporaries  about  an  event  is  good  evidence  that 
it  is  not  authentic.  There  is,  then,  a  limit  to  the  truth-twisting 
of  these  men,  but  a  limit  that  is  imposed  rather  by  the  exigencies 
of  the  situation  than  by  any  desire  to  avoid  partiality. 

Satire  and  flattery  are  tiie  two  pests  of  history.'''''  Of  these 
two  Bayle  states  that  the  former  is  the  more  pernicious,  for 
readers  accept  the  remarks  provoked  by  such  a  spirit  with  more 
sympathy ;  flattery  is  base,  but  satire  may  be  interpreted  as 
prompted  by  a  love  of  liberty.^''  A  historian  who  practices  flat- 
tery often  fails  to  convince.  Such  an  author  by  his  exaggera- 
tions may  make  those  he  flatters  ridiculous,''*  and  may  so  irritate 
the  reader  as  to  drive  him  to  the  opposite  extreme  and  render 
him  unwilling  to  admit  any  virtue  in  the  personage  described.^'* 
Satire  more  often  attains  its  end,  and  so  is  the  more  to  be 
deplored.  Bayle  protests  vigorously  against  the  satirical  spirit, 
and  against  the  particular  violence  which  historians  show  when 
they  write  of  events  in  which  they  have  had  some  personal  con- 


temporary writers  in  regard  to  a  certain  historic  detail  may  be  attributed 
to  their  fear  of  displeasing  the  sovereign. 

"^D.  X.  298,  Marillac  (2),  A:  "la  satire  et  la  flatterie  sont  les  deux 
pestes  de  I'histoire.     .     .     ." 

Cf.  D.  XI.  598-9,  Pericles,  H  :  Bayle  speaks  of  the  deplorable  effects 
of  satire  and  flattery.  He  quotes  Plutarch  and  points  out  again  how 
this  partiality  results  in  augmenting  le  pyrrhonisme  historique.  He  adds 
that  the  abuse  is  particularly  common  in  his  own  day.  Cf.  D.  IX.  448, 
Louis  XIII.  F. 

"  Cf.  Tacitus,  Hist.  Lib.  I.  cap.  I:  "  Quippe  adulationi  foedum  crimen 
servitutis,  malignitati  falsa  species  libertatis  inest."  Bayle  quotes  this 
and  states  that  he  is  merely  following  the  idea  of  Tacitus :  D.  X.  298-9, 
Marillac,  A ;  D.  X.  527,  Morgues,  L. 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  609.  ix :  Bayle  is  quite  inconsistent,  for  he  states  in  this 
case  that  flattery  is  more  enduring  than  satire.  ''  II  y  a  je  ne  sgai  quelle 
f atalite  qui  fait  prevaloir  la  Flaterie  sur  la  Satyre,  generalement  parlant ; 
de  sorte  que  d'une  infinite  de  Libelles  qui  auront  paru  contre  les  Grandeurs 
du  monde,  a  peine  s'en  trouve-t-il  un,  cent  ans  apres,  pendant  que  les 
Relations  qui  les  flattent,  ou  qui  les  epargnent,  sont  entre  les  mains  de 
toute  la  terre." 

^  O.  D.  III.  64.  xcvii. 

**  O.  D.  III.  64.  xcvi. 


50  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

cern.  A  writer  who  is  ordinarily  moderate  and  modest  tends 
to  give  way  to  his  feeHngs  when  he  composes  a  history  which 
touches  on  some  one  who  has  persecuted  him,  and  his  history 
then  becomes  unreHable  on  account  of  his  bias.  And  the  nar- 
rative of  a  man  who  is  naturally  choleric  will  be  all  the  worse. 
A  historian  should  leave  to  his  readers  the  matter  of  praising 
or  blaming;  let  him  occupy  himself  solely  with  presenting  the 
facts. ^"^ 

There  is  another  respect  in  which  partiality  is  an  obstacle  to 
the  historian.  He  must  not  only  strive  to  get  away  from  his 
own  prejudices,  but  he  must  cope  with  the  prejudices  of  those 
upon  whose  evidence  he  relies,  to  a  certain  extent,  for  his 
material,  those  who  have  been  eye-witnesses  of  events,  and  those 
who  have  been  actually  engaged  in  the  making  of  history.  Evi- 
dently it  is  such  people  who  are  the  least  inclined  to  give  unbiased 
reports. 

The  value  of  the  testimony  of  actors  in  the  historical  drama 
and   of  those  who  have  observed   the   drama   from   nearby   is 


^  D.  XIV.  175,  Timee,  L.  On  the  malice  of  historians,  cf.  O.  D.  I. 
521.  Cf.  D.  XIII.  135,  Savonarola,  H :  Bayle  suggests  that  a  historian 
may  take  sides  provided  he  has  first  given  a  faithful  narration  of  the 
events. 

For  satires  proper,  that  is  such  writings  as  are  frankly  partisan  in 
character  and  do  not  pretend  to  the  dignity  of  history,  various  remarks 
by  Bayle  (Cf.  D.  II.  117,  Annat,  A:  ihid.  119,  B;  D.  VII.  185,  Gournai ; 
O.  D.  I.  677,  vi ;  etc.)  and  particularly  his  Dissertation  sur  les  Libcllcs 
Diffaniatoires  (D.  XV.  148-89)  indicate  that  he  has  no  sympathy.  He 
deplores  the  malignity  of  the  authors  of  such  productions,  who  do  not 
hesitate  to  attack  the  most  upright  (D.  XV.  154),  and  he  asserts  that 
satires  sometimes  have  a  grievous  effect  in  the  state,  causing  war  and 
sedition  (D.  XV.  172-3).  It  is  nonsense  to  claim  that  satires  and  libels 
check  vice  because  they  are  a  menace  to  evil-doers,  for  there  is  no 
lack  of  writings  of  this  sort,  yet  the  world  goes  on  in  its  wicked  way 
(D.  XV.  155,  vii.).  Concerning  paneg>'rics,  as  such,  Bayle  is  more 
lenient.  A  certain  license  may  be  granted  to  eulogists  and  they  may 
indulge  in  more  laudation  and  flourish  than  a  historian,  although  positive 
falsehood  cannot  be  allowed  (D.  III.  200,  Baudouin,  E;  cf.  D.  X.  496, 
Montgaillard,  D).  The  custom  of  leaving  out  dates  which  concern  the 
events  of  the  hero's  life  is  objectionable,  and  the  only  reason  for  this 
lack  of  chronological  accuracy  is  indolence  (D.  IV.  311,  Calderinus  {2), 
D).  The  flattery  with  which  Epitres  Dcdicatoires  are  crammed  displeases 
our  author  (O.  D.  IV.  588;  D.  IV.  430,  Capriata,  E). 


History  5 1 

undoubtedly  great.'*'  W'licn  an  equitable  writer  who  has  lived 
in  the  house  of  a  princess  as  one  of  her  suite  gives  evidence 
as  to  the  character  of  the  lady,  his  remarks  have  weight.^"  A 
man  who  has  lived  in  close  touch  with  a  tyrant  can  write  a 
book,  full  of  enlightening  details,  which  will  be  of  great  use  to 
the  future  historian.''" 

But  the  drawback  in  the  case  of  such  testimony  is  the  prejudice 
of  the  witness.  This  same  biographer  of  a  tyrant  may  be  trying 
to  make  a  hero  of  him,  and  the  intelligent  reader  needs  to  be 
on  his  guard. ^"  There  is  danger  in  believing  what  is  said  by 
those  who  have  belonged  to  households  of  the  great,  particularly 
if  they  have  been  favorites  with  their  masters ;  such  men,  out 
of  gratitude,  suppress  the  details  which  do  not  reflect  credit  on 
their  lords.***  Statesmen,  when  questioned  about  events  in  which 
they  are  concerned,  are  inclined  to  suppress  inconvenient  truths.*^ 
A  historian  must  be  cautious  in  giving  weight  to  the  accusations 
which  controversialists  advance  against  their  contemporaries ; 
such  accusations  must  not  be  considered  unless  there  is  satis- 
factory proof  that  they  are  true."*-  Even  the  edicts  and  public 
declarations  of  sovereigns  are  unreliable  as  evidence,  for  they 
are  apt  to  contain  statements  which  are  not  based  in  any  sense 
on  the  facts  of  a  case,  but  are  introduced  on  account  of  the 
political  needs  of  the  moment.  Thus,  when  a  king  is  obliged  to 
treat  with  rebels  who  have  fought  against  him  and  proved  their 
strength,  he  may  declare  in  the  edict  of  peace  that  these  men 


•^'Cf.  D.  I.  269,  Agis,  D;  D.  X.  216-7,  Marcellin;  O.  D.  I.  80;  O.  D.  I. 
295 ;  cf.  Bayle's  remark  on  a  writer  who  had  travelled  much  and  visited 
various  courts  of  Europe :  "  II  a  raison  de  pretendre  que  les  lumiere* 
qu'on  peut  acquerir  en  voyageant  sont  tres-utiles  a  ceux  qui  composent 
une  histoire." 

*^D.  XIV.  518,  Usson.  F. 

~D.  XII.  27,  Philistus,  D. 

"D.  VII.  56,  Geldenhaur,  K;  O.  D.  III.  909:  cf.  D.  XIV.  367,  Vergerius 
(2),  K.  Bayle  states  that  when  a  writer  publishes  details  of  the  private 
life  of  a  monarch  which  are  scandalous  in  character,  he  should  have 
proofs  to  present,  else  he  should  be  given  no  credence. 

*'  D.  VII.  56-7,  Geldenhaur,  L. 

"  D.  III.  410-11,  Beze,  V;  cf.  especially:  *' Vraiment  un  historien 
debiterait  de  beaux  contes,  s'il  s"amusait  a  rapporter  toutes  les  injures 
personnelles  que  les  controversistes  se  chantent,  de  quelque  religion  qu'ils 
soient." 


52  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

have  done  nothing  against  the  interests  of  their  ruler,  but  it  is 
obvious  that  such  a  statement  is  made  merely  because  the  other 
side  demands  it  and  has  the  power  to  enforce  the  demand. 
Similarly  the  edicts  of  a  court  of  justice  may  be  colored  by  the 
practical  needs  of  a  situation.*^  Prejudice,  also,  is  apt  to  be 
at  the  bottom  of  the  reputed  death-bed  confessions  of  persons 
who  have  played  a  part  in  histor}\  Bayle  does  not  believe  that 
a  man  who  has  kept  secret  all  his  life  some  fact  discreditable 
to  him,  will  reveal  it  in  his  last  moments,  and  he  states  that  the 
reports  of  such  confessions  are  frequently  popular  stories,  in- 
vented for  political  or  personal  reasons.** 

Finally  this  plague  of  partiality  presents  itself  in  a  third  form. 
If  the  historian  should  conquer  his  own  prejudices  and  should 
cope  successfully  with  the  biased  statements  which  make  up  a 
part  of  his  testimony,  he  still  has  to  encounter  the  partiality  of 
the  readers  to  whom  his  work  is  presented.  The  public  at  large 
judge  a  history  in  the  light  of  their  own  preconceived  notions. 
They  do  not  take  the  same  trouble  to  be  fair  which  the  author 
may  have  taken  and  they  will  declare  those  details  false  which 
bring  dishonor  on  their  own  party. *^  They  are  unwilling  to 
tolerate  the  frankness  which  would  impel  a  writer  to  admit  some 
fact  damaging  to  his  own  side. 

II  y  a  beaucoup  de  gens  qui  souhaitent  qu'un  historien  de  leur  parti 
imite  les  joueurs  de  piquet,  qui  ne  gardent  que  les  bonnes  cartes,  et 
mettent  dans  leur  ecart  les  mauvaises  qui  leur  etaient  venues.*" 

Evidently  the  general  public  is  not  marked  by  that  absence  of 
passion  which  is  as  necessary  for  judging  a  history  aright  as  it 
is  for  composing  one*'^ — and  evidently  the  equitable  historian 
will  not  easily  satisfy  the  people. 

"D.  X.  306-7,  Marillac,  K;  cf.  O.  D.  III.  1026,  vii. 

"D.  VII.  373-5,  Guise   (3),  F. 

"  D.  IV.  427-9,  Capriata,  C.  Bayle  states  that  he  echoes  the  sentiments 
of  Capriata  on  this  point.  Cf.  D.  X.  526-7,  Morgues,  L :  On  the  way 
Patin,  who  is  prejudiced  against  Richelieu,  welcomes  a  history  which 
abuses  Richelieu. 

"  D.  XII.  506,  Remond,  D. 

*' Cf.  D.  IV.  429,  Capriata,  C:  ".  .  .  si  Ion  peut  dire  que  pour  com- 
poser une  histoire  il  faut  ctre  vide  de  toute  passion,  on  peut  dire  aussi 
qu'il   faut   I'etrc  pour   juger  pertinemment   du   travail   de  I'histoire." 

On  the  difficulties  which  a  historian  encounters  in  the  prejudices  of  the 
reading  public,  cf.   D.   III.   304,   Bembus,  O:     "II  y  a  longtemps   qu'on 


History  53 

He  will  experience  especial  difficulties  in  satisfying  the  ruling 
powers.  An  author  who  writes  the  history  of  contemporary 
kings  or  of  those  who  have  only  recently  died  is  liable  to  get 
into  trouble  with  these  monarchs  or  their  followers  if  he  tells 
unpleasant  truths/'^  In  such  a  case  a  perplexing  alternative 
presents  itself:  either  it  is  necessary  to  disregard  truth,  which 
is  against  the  laws  of  history,  or  it  is  necessary  to  irritate  the 
powers  that  be,  which  is  against  the  laws  of  prudence.  The 
better  way,  suggests  Bayle,  is  to  avoid  the  question  completely 
by  not  treating  such  subjects.*'-'  In  speaking  of  the  dangers  run 
by  a  historian  who  injures  the  honor  of  a  powerful  people, 
he  says : 

Rien  n'est  plus  beau  dans  la  theorie  que  les  idees  du  legislateur  des  his- 
toriens":  il  leur  commande  de  n'oser  dire  rien  qui  soit  faux,  et  d'oser 
dire  tout  ce  qui  est  vrai ;  mais  ce  sont  des  lois  impracticables,  tout  comme 
celles  du  Decalogue  dans  I'etat  oil  le  genre  humain  se  trouve." 

Even  when  partiality  is  avoided,  if  that  ever  happens,  there 
still  remain  manv  obstacles   in  the  wav  of  the  careful   writer 


a  mis  entre  les  difficultes  du  metier  de  I'historien,  la  coutume  qu'ont  les 
lecteurs  de  prendre  pour  des  mensonges  les  actions  sublimes  dont  ils  se 
sentent  incapables." 

♦'Cf.  D.  VII.  465,  Haillan,  E. 

*"€£.  D.  III.  165,  Basta  (2),  B;  D.  IV.  376,  Camden,  K;  D.  IV.  428, 
Capriata,  C;  D.  VII.  465,  Haillan,  E ;  D.  X.  261,  Mariana,  D. 

•*  Bayle  refers  to  Cicero. 

"D.'lII.   548.    Bonfadius.  D. 

Bayle  refers  several  times  to  these  laws  of  history,  ne  quid  falsi  audeat, 
lie  quid  veri  noii  audeat.  Cf.  O.  D.  IV.  744,  cxcvii,  when  he  mentions 
them  in  excusing  himself  for  speaking  freely  in  his  dictionary  of  certain 
great  men;  and  D.  XII.  505,  Remond,  D,  where  he  names  these  precepts 
'"les  deux  grands   statuts  du  metier." 

Bayle  even  yields  a  point  as  to  truth-telling  in  the  case  of  histories 
of  contemporary  rulers.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  114,  viii :  '"  Mille  raisons  veulent 
que  pendant  la  vie  des  Souverains  on  ne  publie  pas  leurs  defauts,  et  Ton 
seroit  trop  farouche  et  d'une  humeur  trop  critique  si  Ton  ne  souffroit 
pas  sans  murmure  qu'on  les  flattat." 

He  suggests  in  one  case,  O.  D.  I.  158,  viii,  that  the  sacred  name  of 
monarch  should  prevent  historians  from  delving  into  the  gallantries  of 
a  royal  family,  at  least  until  long  after  their  time ;  but  elsewhere.  D. 
XIV.  517,  Usson,  F,  he  excuses  a  historian  for  divulging  a  scandal  con- 
cerning a  contemporary  princess — a  scandal  which  was,  however,  notori- 
ous— and  he  also  suggests  here  that  there  is  no  reason  why  the  dignity 
of  princes  should  save  them  from  injurious  truths. 


54  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

who  wishes  to  produce  a  history  that  is  accurate  and  complete. 
History  is  complicated.  There  are  innumerable  facts  to  be  con- 
trolled and  it  is  by  no  means  easy  to  get  at  them.^-  Bayle  refers 
frequently  to  the  need  of  exactness  and  completeness."^  He  has 
hot  w^ords  of  blame  for  those  who  allow  their  imagination  to 
make  up  for  the  documentary  evidence  which  they  are  too  care- 
less to  seek.  He  attacks  fiercely  a  certain  historian,  Guevara, 
who  dared  to  invent  historic  details  out  of  whole  cloth  and  use 
them  as  authentic,  and  who  later  excused  himself  on  the  basis 

Of  precautions  taken  by  rulers  in  the  eflfort  to  guard  against  the 
publication  of  historic  facts  which  reflect  discredit  on  them,  Bayle  says 
that,  after  all.  they  are  useless.  Time  is  sure  to  lay  bare  the  flatteries 
of  historians  and  to  prove  the  futility  of  the  monarch's  attempt  to  deceive 
posterity.  It  is  also  true  that  time  may  free  historical  characters  from 
calumny.     O.  D.  I.  397-8;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  279. 

"'D.  V.  449,  Dejotarus,  O;  D.  VIII.  205,  Horace,  A;  D.  IX.  295, 
Loges,  F;  D.  X.  186,  Mancinellus,  B;  D.  XI.  280-1,  Othon  III,  B.  D; 
O.  D.   I.   185-6. 

°^D.  I.  260,  Agesilaus  (2),  L;  D.  I.  463,  Altaemps,  A;  D.  IV.  540, 
Castalion,  L;  D.  V.  283-4,  Conon  (2),  A;  D.  VI.  248,  Erfort,  C;  D. 
VIII.  344,  Jean,  A;  D.  X.  432-4,  MicraeHus,  D;  D.  XV.  317-8,  Eclair- 
cissemcnt  sur  les  Pyrrhoniens,  V;  O.  D.  I.  12;  O.  D.  I  674;  O.  D.  I. 
92,  V;  O.  D.  III.  547,  xxvii,  549;  cf.  D.  XIV.  440,  Virgile  (2),  A:  on 
the  boldness  of  historians  in  confirming  what  is  doubtful. 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  677,  vi,  where  Bayle  commends  a  book  which  gives  details 
concerning  the  history  of  the  Middle  Ages.  This  subject,  he  adds,  is 
so  hard  and  there  is  such  difficulty  in  handling  the  documents  that  his- 
torians neglect  it  far  too  much. 

There  are  passing  comments  on  the  need  of  exactness  and  complete- 
ness in  biographies.  Cf.  D.  II.  568,  Aurelien,  A;  D.  III.  439,  Bigot  (2), 
G;  D.  V.  124,  Chatel  (2),  G;  D.  VII.  461,  Haillan;  D.  X.  316,  Marot, 
E;  D.  XVI.  25-6,  Avert,  sur  2«  Ed.  There  are  no  remarks  worth  noting 
on  biography  as  a  literary  genre. 

Bayle  mentions  a  number  of  documents  of  miscellaneous  character 
which  may  offer  material  that  is  useful  to  a  historian;  O.  D.  I.  221: 
he  suggests  that  a  poem  may  contain  valuable  details  of  fact :  "  Cela 
rappelle  dans  ma  memoire  ce  que  j'ai  oui  dire  a  des  gens  de  fort  bon 
sens,  qu'un  Recueil  de  Chansons  est  une  Piece  tres-utile  a  un  Historio- 
graphe ;  "  D.  II.  506-7,  Atticus,  H:  A  genealogy  of  the  Roman  magis- 
trates would  be  useful,  Bayle  says,  but  he  does  not  apply  the  remark- 
directly  to  history;  D.  V.  313,  Craterius,  A:  a  collection  of  the  decrees 
of  the  people  of  Athens  would  have  settled  many  questions  if  it  had 
not  been  lost;  O.  D.  I.  605:  A  collection  of  the  lives  of  the  favorites 
of  various  rulers  might  contain  considerable  information,  if  such  a  book 
should  be  written.     Cf.  O.  D.  IV.  736. 


History  55 

that  history  was  so  uncertain  that  a  Htllc  extra  invention  did 
no  harm. 

La  licence  qu'il  sc  donna  dc  falsifier  tout  ce  que  bon  lui  semblait,  et 
de  debiter  comme  des  fails  veritables,  ce  qui  n'etait  que  Ics  inventions 
de  son  cervcau  creux,  approche  de  celle  des  faiseurs  de  romans.  . 
C'etait  done  un  empoisonneur  public  et  un  seducteur ;  et,  dans  le  tribunal 
de  la  republique  des  lettres,  il  meritait  le  chatiment  des  profanes  et  des 
sacrileges,  car  il  violait  ce  qu'il  y  a  de  plus  sacre  dans  I'art  historique." 

Historians  who  have  succeeded  in  niaking  a  reputation  for 
themselves  must  be  especially  careful,  for  their  authority  is  con- 
siderable and  many  writers  depend  upon  them  for  their  facts. '^'^ 

From  time  to  time  Rayle  discusses  some  of  the  problems 
which  come  up  in  connection  with  this  matter  of  accuracy. 
When  a  historian  treats  of  a  period  earlier  than  his  own  he  may 
derive  valuable  infomiation  from  historians  of  that  period. 
Even  if  these  writers  are  rough  and  ignorant  men  they  can  be 
relied  upon  to  furnish  useful  material,  for  the  very  fact  that 
they  are  describing  what  happened  in  their  ow^n  day  means  that 
they  have  recorded  many  details  which  would  occur  only  to 
those  who  have  the  events  fresh  in  mind.^**  Bayle  points  out 
the  fact  that  certain  histories  of  current  events  in  his  own  day 
offer  valuable  data  for  a  historian  and  collect  fugitive  documents 
worth  having.^^ 

Popular  tradition  offers  a  perplexing  problem  to  the  historian 
who  is  searching  for  facts.  As  soon  as  events  take  place  a 
multitude  of  stories  concerning  them  spring  up  among  the  people. 
Often  false  reports  are  spread  at  the  same  time  as  the  true  ones 
and  sometimes  the  false  precede  the  true,   so  that  a  mass  of 


"D.  VII.  322,  3,  Guevara,  B;  cf.  ibid.  D. 

On  historians  who  permit  their  imagination — and  partiality — to  sway 
them,  cf.  O.  D.  III.  758:  "  Voila.  Monsieur,  les  illusions  a  quoi  s'exposent 
les  Historiens  en  mille  rencontres,  lorsqu'au  lieu  de  consulter  les  pieces 
originales,  les  actes  publics,  les  preuves  certaines  des  faits.  ils  s'abandon- 
nent  a  leur  imagination,  et  aux  jalousies  nationales." 

"D.  XII.  375,  Quellenec,  A.     Apropos  of  Mezerai. 

°*  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  222,  ii ;  O.  D.  I.  22 ;  cf.  ref.  to  this  art.  of  the  Nouvelles 
in  Gigas,  691,  J.  Le  Clerc,  note  i ;  cf.  also  D.  XI.  359,  Papesse.  A. 

*'0.  D.  I.  588,  vii.  Here  Bayle  refers  to  a  Relation  Historique  de  ce 
qui  s'est  fait  par  tout  le  monde,  depuis  le  mois  de  Juin,  1685,  (a  bc^'ok 
published  in  1686),  and,  O.  D.  I.  628,  i,  to  a  Histoire  abregee  dc  f Europe 
pour  le  mois  de  Juillct,  etc.   (published  in  1686). 


56  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

tradition  is  handed  down  where  the  fictitious  and  the  real  facts 
are  mingled  together  and  where  the  one  kind  has  just  as  much 
the  authority  of  age  as  the  other.  Sometimes  the  false  report 
is  spread  and  is  never  followed  by  the  true  one.^®  Bayle  com- 
ments especially  on  the  extreme  difficulty  of  getting  at  the  facts 
of  a  tradition  concerning  some  miraculous  happening  and  on 
the  futility  of  conjectures  in  cases  where  the  circumstances  are 
not  well  known.  The  reports  of  various  authors  conflict,  the 
learned  have  one  story,  the  people  another,  pious  frauds  abound. 
Since  there  are  so  many  discrepant  accounts  about  contemporary 
events  of  the  sort,  it  is  not  surprising  that  it  should  be  hard 
to  clear  up  a  tradition  of  this  kind  concerning  an  earlier  period.^® 
Reports  are  exaggerated  more  and  more  as  they  are  spread 
about ; 

le  dernier  qui  parle  est  presque  toujours  le  plus  decisif  et  le  plus 
charge  de  faits.  II  semble  qu'il  s'agisse  d'une  emplette  d'encan,  oi  Ton 
encherit  les  uns  sur  les  autres,  parce  que  la  marchandise  n'est  adjugee 
qu'au  plus  oflfrant  et  dernier  encherisseur.'" 

There  is,  naturally  enough,  little  evidence  of  which  a  historian 
can  make  use  in  such  traditions.  It  is  certain  that  the  fact  that 
a  majority  of  the  people  believe  in  a  story  proves  nothing  as 
to  its  authenticity.**^  A  careful  man  who  has  a  tradition  called 
to  his  attention  will  find  out  whether  it  has  ever  been  put  into 
writing  or  whether  it  is  merely  a  report  which  has  come  down 
orally  for  generations,  and  if  the  latter  is  the  case  he  will  dis- 
regard it."^  The  authority  of  traditions  which  attack  those  who 
have  incurred  popular  hatred  on  account  of  their  oppressions  is 
particularly  "cloubtful.  Here  the  question  of  partiality  comes  up 
once  more.  The  people  welcome  any  report  which  reflects  dis- 
credit on  such  persons,  and  do  not  investigate  its  source.  Then, 
as  generations  pass,  these  traditions  shift  until  they  become  abso- 


''D.  XIV.  518,  Usson,  F. 

''"  D.  IV.  577-80,  Cataldus,  B.  C.  Bayle  protests  against  the  audacity  of 
a  man  who  wrote  an  extravagant  account  of  a  certain  miraculous  event 
and   claimed  the  account   authentic. 

•»D.  VIII.  50,  Henri  III.  S. 

"O.  D.   III.  205,  xii. 

""Cf.  D.  VI.  279,  Esope  (2),  B.  Of  traditions  "  touchant  la  vie  d'un 
particulier." 


History  5  7 

lutely  unreliable.®^  There  are  only  two  cases  in  which  the 
reports  that  spread  among  the  people  call  for  consideration. 

II  ne  faut  jamais  faire  cet  honneur  a  de  tels  bruits  qu'en  ces  deux  cas : 
I'un.  lorsqu'ils  sont  tres-vraisemblables;  I'autre,  lorsqu'on  les  veut  charger 
d'une  note  de  reprobation,  c'est-a-dire,  les  refuter  et  les  siffler.  En  ce 
dernier  cas,  il  est  tres-utile  de  rapporter  ces  sortes  de  traditions,  parce 
que  rien  n'est  plus  propre  a  inspirer  de  la  defiance  contre  les  rapports 
de  la  renommee,  que  de  faire  voir  a  son  siecle  la  sotte  et  ridicule  credulite 
des   precedens.** 

There  may  be  instances  where  a  historian  is  under  obligation, 
in  the  interest  of  completeness,  to  narrate  events  which  he  him- 
self believes  false.*'^  Bayle  states  that  it  may  become  the  his- 
torian's duty  to  give  an  account  of  certain  prodigies  or  miracles 
which  are  generally  reputed  to  have  accompanied  some  event. 
If  the  best  authorities  and  the  best  historic  monuments  attest 
the  authenticity  of  such  a  marvel  the  new  historian  must  record 
it  faithfully.  The  record  of  such  superstitions  is  curious  and 
instructive : 

un  Historien  qui  raconte  la  terreur  qu'une  Comete,  qu'une  eclipse,  qu'une 
inondation  exciterent  dans  un  pais,  a  cause  qu'on  les  prenoit  pour  des 
presages  sinistres,  et  qui  n'oublie  pas  les  processions,  et  les  autres 
ceremonies  religieuses  qui  furent  ordonnees  pour  detourner  ces  presages, 
ne  sort  nullement  de  la  sphere  d'Historien,  car  ce  sont  des  faits,  aussi 
curieux,  aussi  instructifs  que  les  batailles,  que  les  sieges,  que  les  traitez 
d'alliance." 

The  historian  is  of  course  at  liberty  to  state  that  he  believes  the 
prodig>'  utterly  false.  A  writer  who  announces  his  skepticism 
does  well,  for  he  sometimes  saves  his  readers  from  being  mis- 
led.^' Xo  harm  w^ould  come  of  his  expressing  his  unbelief  every 
time  that  such  a  case  is  referred  to.     But  on  that  Bayle  does 


"D.  XI.  473.  Paul  II.  D. 

"  D.  III.  51-2,  Balde,  C     Cf.  D.  VI.  157,  Eucolpius,  B. 

"  Cf.  O.  D.  III.  280:  "  les  plus  celebres  Historiens  de  I'antiquite  ont 
reconnu  qu'il  y  avoit  certaines  choses  qu'ils  n'avoient  nul  droit  de  suprimer 
quoi  qu'ils  ne  les  crussent  pas." 

•"O.   D.   III.   282.   Ixiii. 

"  Cf.  the  following  remark  apropos  of  the  same  question:  "Tout  bon 
historien  qui  raconte  ce  qu'il  juge  fabuleux,  y  joint  un  on  dit  ou  quelque 
clause  qui  temoigne  encore  plus  nettement  ce  qu'il  en  pense ;"  etc.  D. 
VII.  2^2,   Gregoire   I^r,   R. 


58  TJie  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

not  insist,  and  he  is  inclined  to  be  satisfied  with  a  general  state- 
ment at  the  outset  that  the  writer  does  not  vouch  for  all  the 
traditions  which  he  thinks  it  worth  while  to  set  forth.**^ 

Although  these  stories  of  miracles  must  be  heeded  when  they 
are  widespread,  the  demand  for  completeness  in  history-writing 
does  not  require  treating  them  if  they  are  little  known.  Tradi- 
tions concerning  miraculous  or  other  events  having  no  authentic 
basis  and  preserved  in  no  written  record  may  well  be  ignored. 
Yet  even  where  there  is  no  written  account  of  a  prodig>%  the 
absence  of  a  more  authoritative  basis  may  be  due  to  the  reluc- 
tance of  contemporary  writers  to  mention  a  detail  which  would 
bring  them  into  disrepute  with  the  ruling  powers.  On  such  an 
instance  the  historian  must  w^eigh  the  evidence  and,  if  he  thinks 
it  worth  while,  present  the  tradition,  explaining  the  circum- 
stances.^* 

But  while  the  narration  of  prodigies  is  allowable  and  even  to 
be  recommended  under  some  conditions,  historians  are  inclined 
to  carry  the  practice  much  too  far.  Much  untruth  has  been 
brought  into  history  by  their  extreme  readiness  to  record  and 
affirm  marvellous  happenings. '^°  Historians  seem  to  have  a  par- 
ticular weakness  for  such  tales. 

Je  ne  sai  s'ils  cro'ient  que  leurs  Histoires  paroitroient  trop  simples,  s'ils 
ne  meloient  aux  choses  arrivees  selon  le  cours  du  moncle,  quantite  de 
prodiges  et  d'accidens  surnaturels :  ou  s'ils  esperent  que  par  cette  sorte 
d'assaisonemens,  qui  reviennent  fort  au  gout  naturel  de  rhomme,  ils 
tiendront  toujours  en  haleine  leur  Lecteur,  en  lui  fournissant  toujours 
de  quoi  admirer ;  ou  bien  s'ils  se  persuadent  que  la  rencontre  de  ces 
coups  miraculeux  signalera  leur  Histoire  dans  le  tems  a  venir;  mais 
quoi  qu'il  en  soit,  on  ne  peut  nier  que  les  Historiens  ne  se  plaisent 
extremement  a  compiler  tout  ce  qui  sent  le  miracle.^ 

This  tendency  has  a  bearing  on  the  question  of  the  relation  of 
poetry   and  history.     Those  who  claim  that  the   relation   is   a 


"*  O.  D.  III.  281.  Bayle  adds  that  a  discussion  of  how  much  fact  there 
is  in  such  traditions  is  permissible,  but  that  the  discussion  must  not 
turn  into  partisan  controversy,  where  the  tradition  is  supported  or 
opposed  according  to  the  prejudice  of  the  writer. 

"O.    D.    III.   280. 

'"  Ibid. 

"O.  D.  III.  10,  II. 


History  59 

close  and  a  desirable  one,  and  that  to  be  a  historian  one  must 
be  a  poet,  are  exposed  in  this  case  to  the  attacks  of  critics  who 
may  say  that  here  indeed  these  two  genres  have  a  common  char- 
acteristic since  they  both  display  this  weakness  for  the  mar- 
vellous.'- History  should  not  be  so  characterised.  The  intro- 
duction of  marvellous  and  supernatural  elements  such  as  a 
reader  has  a  right  to  expect  in  a  piece  of  poetry,  has  no  place 
in  histor}' ;  it  conflicts  with  the  simplicity  and  naturalness  which 
must  be  found  in  historical  writing.  Bayle  criticises  Herodotus 
for  not  recognising  this  distinction  between  poetry  and  history 
and  for  bringing  the  miraculous  into  his  work.'-' 

A  history  should  be  written  in  a  style  that  is  clear  and  natural ; 

les  veritables  regies  de  I'art  Historique  .  .  .  demandent  beaucoup 
d'ordre,  un  stile  net,  court,  simple,  sans  affectation,  sans  figures,  ni 
autres   ornemens   oratoires     .  ."* 

Various  references  show  that  Bayle  is  inclined  to  insist  on  clear- 
ness as  a  prime  requisite. ^^     It  is  necessary  to  bring  out  the 


"  O.  D.  Ill,  II,  V.  On  the  love  of  historians  for  the  marvellous,  cf. 
O.  D.  Ill,  62,  xciv,  64.  xcvi.  66;  O.  D.  I.  626,  vii. 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  531,  ii.  where  Bayle  speaks  of  the  complaint  that  there 
are  no  longer  any  prodigies  and  marvellous  happenings  in  his  day  as 
there  were  in  the  ages  gone  by,  and  says  that  future  historians  will 
supply  the  want  and  credit  the  seventeenth  century  with  as  many  marvels 
as  the  previous  centuries. 

"  D.  XII.  358,  Psammitichus,  B.  On  the  unreliability  of  historians  who 
report  prodigies,  cf.  D.  VI.  160,  Ephore,  A.     Bayle  quotes  Seneca  here. 

'*  O.   D.   I.   202,  iv. 

"Cf.  D.  IV.  426.  Capriata:  Bayle  praises  Capriata  as  a  historian  and 
says :  "  II  expose  les  f  aits  avec  une  grande  nettete,  il  en  developpe  les 
motifs,  et  les  instrumens,  et  les  suites  .  .  ."  D.  XII.  504,  Remond, 
D:  "  Elle  (history)  demande  un  homme  qui  ait  .  .  .  un  style  noble, 
clair  et  serre  .  .  ."  D.  X.  433,  Micraelius,  D:  "  Un  historien  exact 
choisit  ses  paroles  avec  tant  de  soin,  qu'il  ne  donne  pas  a  deviner  a 
ses  lecteurs  si  les  assiegeans  se  retirerent  d'eux-memes,  ou  s'ils  attendi- 
rent  qu'on  les  attaquat."' 

O.  D.  I.  588,  vi :  "  L'abdication  de  cette  Reine  (Christine)  se  voit  ici 
narree  fort  nettement ;  c'est  une  des  bonnes  qualites  de  cet  Auteur 
(Pufendorf)  que  la  nettete  d'esprit:  son  style  est  noble,  grave,  et  coulant, 
et    n'a    point    d'affectation." 

O.  D.  I.  L.  24.  "II  (Duverdier)  conserve  fort  le  caractere  d'un 
Historien,  enchainant  bien  les  matieres  en  decouvrant  les  motifs,  et 
ecrivant  avec  beaucoup  de  nettete  et  de  clarte. 


6o  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

striking  traits  of  the  personages  described,  in  such  a  way  as  to 
give  the  greatest  enlightenment  to  the  readers."*^  As  to  concise- 
ness, Bayle  suggests  in  one  place  that  a  historian  who  is  notably 
concise  affords  less  instruction  than  one  who  is  blameworthy  for 
being  prolix ;' ^  but  elsewhere  he  suggests  that  too  many  details 
may  obscure  the  really  important  facts. "^  There  is  a  knack  of 
indicating  details  briefly,  so  that  valuable  information  is  given 
without  lengthiness.'^"  The  desire  of  historians  to  appear  learned 
sometimes  makes  them  indulge  in  long  digressions  which  intro- 
duce a  multitude  of  details  having  little  relation  to  the  text. 
Such,  for  example,  would  be  the  remarks  of  one  who  reports 
the  appearance  of  a  comet,  and  goes  on  to  discuss  the  influence 
of  the  heavenly  bodies  on  human  events.  The  practice  is  repre- 
hensible. Furthermore,  the  weight  of  these  writers  as  chron- 
iclers of  historical  facts  which  they  are  supposed  to  have  inves- 
tigated does  not  give  authority  to  the  statements  made  in 
digressions  concerning  other  spheres  of  knowledge.*"  Since 
Bayle  demands  simplicity  and  lack  of  affectation  he  naturally 
does  not  demand  polish.  But  he  seems  to  think  that  attention 
to  details  of  euphony,  the  kind  of  attention  paid  by  an  orator 
to  such  matters,  is  permissible,  provided  it  is  not  extreme.*^ 

Although  simplicity  is  so  desirable  in  a  historian's  style,  a 
reasonable  effort  to  produce  vivid  and  striking  narrative  is  to 
be  recommended.  The  power  of  expression  which  belongs  to 
an  orator  or  a  poet  may  be  most  useful  here,  provided,  of  course, 


"  D.  V.  559,  Domitia  Longina,  A.      Cf.  ibid.,  C. 

"D.  XV.  150,  I.  Dissert,  sur  les  LibcUes  Diff.  III.  The  ancient  his- 
torians were  too  concise,  says  Bayle.     Cf.  D.  II.  271,  Archelaus    (4),  K. 

''  D.  XII.  38,  Phlegon,  A. 

"D.  II.  271,  Archelaus  (4),  K. 

""O.  D.  III.  II,  vi.  Cf.  D.  XIV.  no,  Theopompe,  F.  where  Bayle 
objects  vigorously  to  a  criticism  of  Tacitus  and  declares  the  attack  on 
his  digressions  unjust  and  extravagant. 

"  D.  XIV.  107,  Theopompe :  Concerning  care  as  to  euphony  and  har- 
mony in  style  Bayle  says:  "  il  y  a  sans  doute  je  ne  sais  quelle  petitesse 
dans  ces  sortes  d'affectations,  lorsque  la  grandeur  et  la  majeste  du 
sujet  doit  attirer  toute  I'attention  de  I'ecrivain."  But  he  adds  that  a 
moderate  care  in  avoiding  "  la  rencontre  des  voyelles  "  is  allowable. 


History  6x 

that  flourish  and  pomp  are  avoided.**-  Bayle  has  considerable 
praise  for  Maimbourg  on  the  score  of  the  interesting  way  in 
which  he  writes  history.  He  states  that  it  would  be  a  great 
boon  to  the  repubhc  of  letters  if  those  who  have  much  more 
learning  and  exactness  than  Maimbourg  should  be  able  to  give 
their  writings  the  same  attractiveness.*^  It  is  true,  of  course, 
that  the  vividness  which  a  writer  is  able  to  put  into  his  account 
depends  much  upon  the  subject  matter  he  has  to  deal  with. 
War,  battles,  revolutions,  brilliant  and  stirring  events — ^such  are 
the  themes  which  awaken  the  eloquence  of  the  author  and  the 
interest  of  the  reader. 

Un  historien  qui  n'a  point  de  grands  evenemens  a  decrire  s'endort  sur 
son  ouvrage,  et  fait  bailler  ses  lecteurs;  mais  une  guerre  civile,  deux 
ou  trois  conspirations,  autant  de  batailles.  les  memes  chefs  tantot  abattus, 
tantot  releves,  aiguisent  sa  plume,  echauffent  son  imagination,  et  tiennent 
toujours  en  haleine  ceux  qui  lisent.  Je  crois  franchement  que  si  on 
lui  commandait  de  faire  I'histoire  d'un  regne  pacifique,  et.  tout  d'une 
piece,  il  se  plaindrait  de  son  sort  a  peu  pres  comme  Caligula  se  plaignit 
de  ce  que  sous  son  empire  il  n'arrivait  pas  de  grands  malheurs 
Son  ouvrage  est  un  vaisseau  qui  ne  vogue  jamais  mieux  qu'en  temps  de 
tourmente :  la  tempete  est  son  bon  vent :  le  calme  lui  est  aussi  contraire 
qu'a  un  vaisseau  effectif.^ 


"' Cf.  supra,  pp.  25,  26.  Cf.  D.  XIV.  106,  Theopompe,  C:  in  this  case 
Bayle  brings  up  the  question  whether  orators  and  poets  are  fitted  to  be 
historians,  but  adds  no  comment  of  his  own  except  to  suggest  there 
is  considerable  danger  of  a  flowery  style  in  histories  written  by  such 
men. 

'"D.  X.  137,  Maimbourg,  D;  cf.  O.  D.  II.  19,  iv.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  27, 
iii.  Here  Bayle  suggests  that  perhaps  Maimbourg  has  found  "  le  secret 
de  donner  a  I'Histoire  I'air  du  Roman,  et  au  Roman  I'air  de  I'Histoire, 
ce  qui  n'est  pas  un  don  mediocre     .     .     ." 

^D.  VIII.  92,  Hercule,  R.  Bayle  adds  that  the  taste  which  prefers 
accounts  of  military  prowess  to  descriptions  of  the  virtues  men  show 
in  time  of  peace  is  depraved,  but  very  wide  spread.  He  deplores  the 
same  tendency  to  prefer  the  brilliant  to  the  solid  in  the  case  of  poets 
and  orators  and  in  the  case  of  the  public  to  whom  these  writers  appeal. 
Cf.  O.  D.  I.  587,  vi,  where  Bayle  says  the  exploits  of  the  great  Gus- 
tavus  Adolphus  make  a  fine  subject  for  a  history. 

On  the  question  of  how  a  historian  may  be  helped  by  the  nature  of 
the  subject  he  deals  with,  cf.  D.  VI.  628,  Furius,  D:  "II  arrive  aux 
historiens  la  meme  chose  qu'a  un  voyageur :  ils  rencontrent  de  temps 
en  temps  certaines  matieres   qui  sont  comme  des  bourbiers,  ou  comme 


62  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

But,  however  much  a  writer  is  helped  or  hindered  by  his  subject 
matter,  Bayle  evidently  thinks  that  he  must  devote  attention  to 
the  vividness  of  his  narrative.-' 


un  chemin  uni,  large,  bien  pave,  etc."  But  here  Bayle  refers  to  a  case 
where  a  certain  event  is  useful  to  a  partisan  historian  in  enabling  him 
to  reflect  credit  on  the  historical  personage  whom  he  favors.  The  same 
event  is,  of  course,  awkward  for  the  writers  on  the  other  side. 

"  It  does  not  strike  Bayle  that  the  speeches  attributed  by  historians 
to  generals  whose  exploits  they  narrate,  Thucydidean  speeches,  that  is, 
lend  any  vividness  to  an  account.  His  only  comment  on  such  harangues 
is  as  to  their  unreliability.  D.  IV.  507,  Cassius   (4),  L. 


VII 

SCHOLARSHIP 

For  the  writer  of  the  Dictionnaire  Historiquc  ct  Critique 
scholarship  is  of  course  a  matter  of  extreme  importance.  Bayle 
has  a  high  regard  for  learning,  and  for  the  erudite  critic  who 
is  occupied  with  collating  facts  and  eliminating  errors  in  the 
world  of  things  learned.  He  is  alert  to  defend  the  enthusiasms 
of  scholars  for  the  fine  points  of  their  trade,  and  he  has  a 
variety  of  comments  to  make  as  to  how  scholars  shall  maintain 
a  standard  of  excellence  commensurate  with  the  dignity  of  their 
calling. 

It  is  in  the  advance  notice  published  by  Bayle  concerning  the 
aims  of  his  own  dictionary  that  he  takes  up  the  question  of 
the  utility  of  that  critical  research  work  in  which  so  much 
attention  is  paid  to  a  minute  exactness.  He  grants  that  such 
labors  are  eminently  impractical,  that  they  have  no  value  in 
supplying  daily  bread.  Indeed  were  man  an  entirely  reasonable 
creature  he  would  concern  himself  only  with  the  salvation  of 
his  soul  and  with  procuring  the  amount  of  nourishment  neces- 
sary to  keep  the  soul  allied  to  the  body  during  his  allotted  days. 
But.  things  mundane  being  as  they  are,  it  is  a  fact  that  man 
find?  interest  and  pleasure  in  study,  as  well  as  in  Belles  Lettres 
and  the  arts. 

II  faut  done,  malgre  qu'on  en  ait,  que  Ton  m'accorde  qu'il  y  a  une 
infinite  de  productions  de  I'esprit  humain  qui  sent  estimees,  non  pas 
a  cause  de  leur  necessite,  mais  a  cause  qu'elles  nous  divertissent ;  et 
sur  ce  pied-la  n'est-il  pas  juste  de  remarquer  les  faussetes  des  auteurs, 
puisqu'il  y  a  tant  de  gens  qui  se  plaisent  a  savoir  la  verite,  jusque  dans 
les  choses  ou  leur  fortune  est  la  moins  interessee? 

N'est-il  pas  certain  qu'un  cordonnier,  qu'un  meunier,  qu'un  jardinier, 
sont  infiniment  plus  necessaires  a  un  etat  que  les  plus  habiles  peintres 
ou  sculpteurs,  qu'un  Michel  Ange,  ou  qu'un  cavalier  Bernin?  N'est-il 
pas  vrai  que  le  plus  chetif  magon  est  plus  necessaire,  dans  une  ville, 
que  le  plus  excellent  chronologue  ou  astronome,  qu'un  Joseph  Scaliger 
ou  qu'un  Copernic?  On  fait  neanmoins  infiniment  plus  de  cas  du  travail 
de   ces  grands   hommes,   dont  on   se   pourrait    fort   bien   passer,    que    du 


64  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

travail  absolument  necessaire  de  ces  artisans.  Tant  il  est  vrai  qu'il 
y  a  bien  des  choses  dont  on  ne  regie  le  prix  que  par  rapport  a  un  honnete 
divertissement,  ou  a  un  simple  ornement  de  I'ame.^ 

The  utility  of  learning,  then,  is  nil.  as  far  as  practical  consid- 
erations go.  But  it  is  in  the  nature  of  man  to  take  an  interest 
in  the  details  of  erudition,  his  truth-seeking  instinct  makes  him 
want  to  know  things  that  have  no  material  effect  on  his  daily 
life.  Certainly  Bayle  believes  this  instinct  worth  catering  to, 
certainly  he  approves  this  high  ideal  of  Veritas.  He  adds,  in 
the  same  dissertation,  that  critical  work  is  of  real  moral  benefit. 
]\Ian  is  humbled  when  he  is  brought  face  to  face  with  the  vanity 
of  the  human  intelligence,  when  his  attention  is  called  to  the 
innumerable  faults  of  men  of  learning.^ 

The  value  our  author  places  on  things  erudite  is  evident  from 
the  emphasis  with  which  he  deplores  the  lack  of  interest  in 
learning  in  his  own  time.^  A  savant  who  has  a  vast  collection 
of  facts  concerning  chronology,  geography,  mytholog}-,  who  can 
elucidate  difficult  passages  in  the  ancient  writers  and  explain 
grammatical  points — such  a  man  is  no  longer  esteemed.  It  is 
the  practice  to  stigmatize  as  pedantry  the  study  of  such  details. 
Hence  young  men  who  have  the  gifts  that  would  enable  them 
to   do   scholarly   work,   turn   away   from   an   occupation    which 


'  D.  XV.  239,  Dissert,  cont.  le  Pro  jet,  viii ;  cf.  ibid.  238:  "II  faut 
avouer,  d'autre  cote,  n'en  deplaise  a  Ciceron,  que  toutes  les  beautes  de 
la  peinture,  de  la  sculpture,  de  I'architecture,  ne  servent  qu'au  plaisir 
des  yeux  ,  et  a  donner  une  agreable  admiration  aux  connaisseurs."  Cf. 
D.  XVI.  I,  2,  Pref.  de  la  i«  Ed;  especially :  "  II  est  .  .  .  certain 
que  la  decouverte  des  erreurs  (in  fact)  n'est  importante  ou  utile  ni  a 
la  prosperite   de   I'etat,  ni  a  celle  des  particuliers." 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  125,  iv ;  especially:  "  Ce  n'est  done  point  par  rapport  a 
I'utilite  publique  qu'il  faut  juger  si  un  Auteur  merite  des  loiianges. 
Quelles  que  soient  ses  occupations,  il  faut  regarder  s'il  a  ete  necessaire 
d'employer  beaucoup  d'esprit,  pour  arriver  au  point  ou  il  est  venu.  C'est 
a  cette  regie  que  nous  devons  proportionner  notre  admiration  et  les 
loiianges   que   nous   donnons  a   la  beaute   du  genie." 

^  D.  XV.   241-3,  Dissert,  cont.  le  Pro  jet,  ix. 

Bayle  also  adds,  ibid.  p.  240,  that  the  attention  paid  to  the  minute 
details  of  erudition  concerning  the  ancients  has  had  a  fortuitous  but 
most  happy  result.  This  kind  of  study  inspired  a  certain  veneration 
for  the  ancients,  and  on  account  of  this  spirit  of  reverence  the  splendid 
maxims  of  the  ancients  are  received  with  particular  respect. 

="  D.  X.  427,  8,  Meziriac,  C. 


Scholarship  65 

offers  no  chance  of  honor  or  renown.  Certain  baui.v-csf^rils 
or  would  be  bcaux-csprits  condemn  the  introduction  into  the 
writings  of  an  author  of  citations  from  the  ancients  and  oi  other 
comments  which  suggest  learning.  They  even  attack  this  prac- 
tice in  the  case  of  polished  writers  like  Costar  and  Voiture. 
There  is  an  excellent  pretext  for  taking  this  position  ;  it  is  easy 
to  claim  that  there  is  more  credit  in  thinking  for  oneself  than 
in  accumulating  the  thoughts  of  others.''  Bayle  admits  the  truth 
of  tlie  statement,  but  ho  liolds  that  it  is  used  as  an  excuse  by 
men  who  are  too  superficial  and  indolent  to  devote  themselves 
to  learning,  men  who  would  be  glad  to  make  use  of  erudition 
if  they  possessed  it.  It  is  a  shame  that  the  condition  of  learning 
has  fallen  so  low.^ 

Bayle's  sympathy  with  the  efforts  of  scholars  and  with  their 
mode  of  life  is  apparent.  He  understands  how  a  man  of  learn- 
ing may  desire  to  lead  a  life  of  seclusion  and  how  he  may  get 
a  maximum  of  satisfaction  out  of  devoting  himself  wholly  to 
study."  Those  savants  are  indeed  fortunate,  he  says,  who  can 
work   fourteen  or  fifteen   hours   a   day   without   injuring  their 


*  It  is  just  enough  to  protest  against  such  citations,  says  Bayle,  when 
they  are  inapt  and  when  they  are  introduced  to  prove  what  every  one 
knows. 

°  In  this  same  reference  (cf.  supra,  p.  64,  n.  3)  Bayle  cites  three 
instances  of  the  unpopularity  of  things  erudite.  His  remarks  on  the 
subject  are  provoked  by  the  slight  interest  shown  in  a  commentary 
on  Apollodorus  by  Meziriac.  He  also  refers  to  the  publication  of  a 
translation  of  Homer  to  which  the  original  is  not  added  apparently 
because  the  Greek  characters  would  turn  away  the  reader,  and  he  speaks 
of  the  small  favor  with  which  the  public  received  a  book  treating  the 
mistakes  in  erudition  found  in  Telemaque. 

As  to  what  the  condition  of  learning  is  in  his  own  day,  Bayle  is  by 
no  means  consistent.  He  comments  elsewhere,  O.  D.  I.  180,  ii,  on  the 
great  interest  that  is  being  taken  in  archeological  studies,  and  in  the 
notice  concerning  his  Dictionary,  D.  XV.  237-8,  he  claims  that  never 
before  has  more  attention  been  paid  to  the  correction  of  facts  in  things 
of  erudition.  This  notice  is  dated  May  5.  1690.  The  remarks  in 
note  3,  p.  64,  were  evidently  written  in  1700,  for  there  is  a  reference 
to  the  Nouvelles  de  la  Republique  des  lettres  du  mois  dernier  and  a 
foot  note  states  that  this  number  of  the  Nouvelles  is  the  one  for  No- 
vember  1700. 

"D.  VIII.  494.  Junius    (3),  C     Cf.  D.   III.  304,  Bembus,  U. 


66  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

health/  And  he  indicates  his  own  preference  for  that  kind  of 
existence  which  a  true  cruditus  finds  so  attractive.* 

The  advice  which  Bayle  gives  concerning  the  studies  of  his 
younger  brother  indicates  his  ideas  as  to  what  should  be  the 
training  of  a  scholar  and  as  to  what  should  be  the  characteristics 
of  the  finished  product.''  This  matter  of  training  he  considers 
to  be  of  the  utmost  importance ;  the  education  which  a  youth 
receives,  in  the  fonnative  period  of  his  life,  stamps  him  for- 
ever.^'^  The  method  to  be  followed  in  education  should  be 
determined  in  every  case  by  the  needs  of  the  individual ;  a 
teacher  should  understand  the  mentality  of  the  student  and  his 
special  requirements  and  direct  him  accordingly.  For  that 
reason  there  must  not  be  a  rigid  observance  of  set  rules — but 
a  few  general  principles  are  worth  mentioning. 

Careful  scholarship  and  ability  to  make  intelligent  use  of  one's 
learning  are  the  essentials.  Bayle  writes  his  brother  to  devote 
himself  to  Latin,  Greek  and  History,  and  emphasizes  the  need 
of  exactness  in  this  work.  In  the  study  of  languages  the  brother 
shall  busy  himself  with  the  technicalities  of  grammar  until  he 
has  thoroughly  mastered  the  details,  and  he  shall  pay  careful 
attention  to  literary  expression,  to  allusions,  to  the  exact  mean- 
ing of  each  sentence.  In  this  w^ay  he  will  attain  two  objects 
at  once :  he  will  learn  the  language,  and  he  will  come  to  appre- 
ciate and  understand  the  thoughts  of  the  author.  He  shall  be 
as  rigidly  exact  in  getting  the  full  significance  of  what  he  reads 
in  these  languages  as  though  he  had  to  come  before  examiners 
who  would  compel  him  to  explain  the  slightest  details  of  thought 
and  expression.  The  habit  of  thinking  about  what  is  read,  and 
answering   such   imaginary   questions,    accustoms    the    mind    to 

'  D.  VII.  482,  Hall,  B.  As  for  the  rest,  Bayle  adds,  who  are  not 
blessed  with  such  robust  constitutions,  they  do  well  to  take  care  of 
themselves ;  they  will  accomplish  more  in  the  long  run  and  be  more 
useful  to  the  Republic  of  Letters  by  producing  a  little  each  day  and 
keeping  well.  If  they  devote  themselves  with  too  much  zeal  to  their 
labors  they  break  down,  and  lose  time  in  the  end. 

"  D.  XVI.  8,  Preface  de  la  i^  Ed.,  II.  Cf.  D.  XV.  224,  Dissert,  cottt.. 
le  Projet. 

•O.  D.  I.  L.  32-5. 

"O.  D.  I.  L.  26,  X.     Cf.  O.  D.  IV.  583,  xl. 

Bayle  regrets  that  he  did  not  have  more  guidance  in  his  own  educa- 
tion.    O.  D.  I.  L.  37. 


Scholarship  67 

form  clear  conceptions,  to  make  use  of  its  knowledge.     This 

is  vital, 

car  ce  n'est  pas  ctre  savant  que  de  ne  se  savoir  pas  servir  de  sa  science, 
tout  de  meme  qu'un  soldat  qui  est  si  embarasse  de  ses  arnies  qu'il  ne 
peut  se  remuer,  n'est  pas  un  veritable  soldat." 

History  is  to  be  studied  with  the  same  care  for  details  and 
with  the  same  attention  to  intelligent  thinking.  Maps  and 
chronological  tables  are  important  in  helping  to  establish  events 
in  their  relationships  one  to  another.  The  exact  understanding 
of  the  facts  of  history  is  essential,  but  this  is  not  all.  Events 
must  be  considered  carefully  as  to  causes,  as  to  the  fundamental 
reason  for  this  or  that  particular  development ;  historical  per- 
sonages must  be  studied  as  to  the  important  traits  of  their  char- 
acters, as  to  what  motives  prompted  their  actions,  why  they 
failed  in  some  enterprises  and  succeeded  in  others.  Get  the 
facts  and  then  think  about  them.  Do  not  try  to  run  through 
many  books ;  read  less  and  retain  more.^- 

W'hile  the  young  scholar  is  learning  how  to  read  and  how 
to  turn  his  reading  to  account  there  is  another  consideration  for 
him   to  bear  in   mind  constantly.     He  must   avoid   pedantry," 

"O.  D.  I.  L.  32. 

Bayle  does  not  believe  in  methods  which  purport  to  teach  four  or 
five  languages  at  the  same  time.  These  methods  are  either  worked  out 
by  charlatans  who  seek  advertisement,  or  by  savants  who  are  particu- 
larly keen  in  perceiving  the  fundamental  relations  of  things.  The 
quacks  are  ridiculous,  the  scholars  are  too  erudite  for  youthful  minds. 
O.  D.  I.  L.  37- 

'-0.   D.   I.   L.   33.     Cf.    supra,   pp.   39.   40- 

On  the  matter  of  getting  the  right  habits  as  a  reader,  cf.  O.  D.  I. 
678,  i :  '■  C'est  deja  beaucoup  que  d'avoir  une  bonne  Bibliotheque,  mais 
le  principal  est  de  s'en  bien  servir,  soit  par  I'assiduite  au  travail,  soit 
par  les  talens  que  Ton  a  regus  de  la  Nature."  O.  D.  I.  L.  47,  xxviii : 
"  J'appelle  voyages  d'esprit  une  lecture  vaste  et  illimitee  de  toutes  sortes 
de  Livres.  Si  on  les  entreprend  ces  voyages-la  avant  que  les  forces  soient 
venues,  c'est-a-dire,  avant  que  d'avoir  pose  un  bon  fondement  pour 
les  materiaux  que  Ton  va  chercher  de  tous  cotes,  on  risque  de  voir 
bien-tot  son  batiment  renverse."  O.  D.  IV.  863 :  "  Ceux  qui  ont  lu 
d'une  fagon  vague  toutes  sortes  de  Livres,  savent  un  peu  de  tout,  et 
ne  possedent  rien  a  fond,"  etc. 

"O.  D.  I.  L.  34- 

Bayle  indicates  a  number  of  times  his  objection  to  pedantry:  D.  II. 
181.  Apollinaris.  D:  D.  IV.  481,  Cateromachus,  B;  O.  D.  I.  144,  v; 
O.  D.  IV.  729,  clxxxv. 


68  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

he  must  not  publish  the  fact  that  he  is  a  student  or  try  to  air 
his  learning.  A\'hen  he  is  out  among  his  fellows  he  must  adapt 
himself  to  their  conversation  and  refrain  from  obtruding  his 
own  remarks  on  things  learned.  It  is  a  good  thing  for  him  not 
to  stick  too  closely  to  his  books,  for  him  to  take  an  interest  in 
social  activities  ;^*  in  that  way  he  will  come  to  know  the  world. 

Such  are  Bayle's  counsels  to  his  brother.  The  theme  dwelt 
on  with  the  most  insistence  here,  the  need  of  absolute  accuracy, 
is  one  that  is  repeated  again  and  again  throughout  his  writings. 
There  are  many  general  comments  on  the  subject  and  various 
remarks  on  the  demand  for  accuracy  in  particular  kinds  of 
scholarly  work. 

A  savant  must  have  complete  and  exact  control  of  the  facts 
of  the  case  with  which  he  is  dealing.  Apropos  of  this  Bayle 
says: 

Le  maxime  de  Descartes  est  la  plus  raisonnable  du  monde,  que  pour 
eviter  de  se  tromper  il  n'est  rien  tel  que  de  suspendre  son  jugement 
jusqu'a  ce  qu'on  ait  examine  les  choses  avec  la  derniere  exactitude,  et 
qu'il  n'y  a  point  de  source  d'erreurs  plus  feconde  que  la  precipitation 
de  juger     .     .     ."" 

He  refers  many  times  to  the  necessity  of  consulting  sources  in 
order  to  get  these  facts. ^*^  And  when  a  scholar  has  control  of 
the  facts  he  must  use  them  absolutely  as  he  finds  them,  and 
not  remodel  them  to  suit  his  own  requirements.^^     Exactness  is 


"  Cf .  D.  IX.  302,  Loyer.  Bayle  states  that  it  is  possible  and  desirable 
to  be  both  learned  and  polished:  O.  D.  I.  L.  75;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  38, 
67.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  175:  Bayle  advocates  science  du  monde  for  stu- 
dents; D.  V.  321,  Cremonin,  A:  Bayle  approves  of  a  professor  whose 
conversation  outside  of  the  class-room  was  more  polished  and  pleasant 
than  learned;  O.  D.  III.  505,  6:  "  Une  erudition  mediocre  accom- 
pagnee  de  politesse,  fait  souvent  beaucoup  plus  d'honneur  qu'une  erudi- 
tion profonde  sans  politesse.  Ce  goCit-la  regne  assez  en  France  presente- 
ment,  et  Ton  s'appergoit  que  les  gens  de  Lettres  s'y  conforment." 

"O.  D.  I.  L.  99,  Ixvi.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  300:  "rien  ne  fait  plus  de  tort 
aux  Critiques,  aussi  bien  qu'aux  Philosophes  que  de  se  hater  a  prendre 
leurs  conclusions." 

"  D.  I.  404,  Alcman,  A;  D.  II.  49,  Anaxagoras,  K;  D.  II.  443,  Arsenius 
(3),  A;  D.  VI.  171,  Epicure,  C;  D.  XVI.  8,  Prcf.  dc  la  v  lid.  Ill:  O.  D. 
III.   729,  30. 

"  D.  I.  3,  Aaron,  C;  D.  I.  200,  Adam,  D;  D.  III.  237,  Boaumoiu,  I; 
D.   XII.  7,   Phasis,  A. 


Scholarship  69 

demanded  in  the  finest  points.  The  minutest  details  concerning 
manuscripts.'^  different  editions,'"  the  spelling  of  proper  names,'-'^ 
dates,-'  the  titles  of  books  referred  to,--  typographical  errors-^ — 
all  these  have  their  importance  and  must  be  given  attention. 

The  remarks  made  by  Bayle  in  the  Preface  which  he  writes 
for  Furetiere's  Dictionary  show  the  important  place  he  gives  to 
exactness  in  the  case  of  lexicography.-'*  In  commending  Fure- 
tiere's work  he  mentions  especially  its  completeness,  the  variety 
of  subjects  treated,  the  excellence  of  the  examples  given,  the 
remarks  on  the  different  arts  and  sciences. ^^  These  details,  he 
adds,  make  the  book  interesting  as  well  as  complete  and  exact. 
One  very  praiseworthy  feature  is  the  accuracy  of  the  definitions. 
These  careful  definitions  are  not  only  good  as  such  but  they  give 
valuable  training  to  the  reader  by  getting  him  into  the  habit  of 
thinking  clearly  and  justly.-*^  It  is  to  be  expected  that  many 
corrections  will  have  to  be  made  in  Furetiere's  work,  for  a  dic- 
tionary is  always  open  to  improvement ;  it  could  hardly  be  other- 
wise in  the  case  of  a  book  where  there  is  such  a  demand  for 


''D.  II.  476,  Artemise  (2),  C. 

'"D.   I.  432,  Alegambe,  B;   D.  IX.  577,  Luther,  GG. 

="0.  I.  214,  Adam  (3),  H;  D.  III.  385,  Berulle,  note  12;  D.  VI.  163. 
Ephore,  B;  O.  D.  I.  375. 

"D.  I.  99,  Abulfeda,  B ;  D.  X.  338,  Marsus,  C 

'^D.  II.    119,  Annat,  C. 

"^D.  III.  88,  Barbarus  (2),  A. 

Apropos  of  accuracy  in  regard  to  various  points  cf.  D.  XV.  236, 
Dissert.  Cont.  le  Projet;  D.  XV.  380,  Preface  sur  Diet,  de  Moreri;  D. 
XV.  384,  Preface  sur  Diet,  de  Moreri;  D.  IV.  425,  Cappadoce,  K ;  O.  D. 
I.  102,  Avertissement;  O.  D.  III.  523-4,  xv ;  cf.  also  D.  II.  103.  .^ndroni- 
cus,  B :  Bayle  grants  that  great  exactness  is  frequently  tiresome  for 
the  reader;  cf.  also  D.  III.  159,  Basnage,  C:  "  Les  fautes  sont  comme 
les  etincelles :  ce  qui  n'est  d'abord  que  le  changement  d'une  lettre,  devient 
quelquefois  une  complication  ou  un  amas  de  faussetes  monstrueuses." 

"O.  D.  IV.  188-93. 

"O.  D.  IV.  189. 

^  O.  D.  IV.  190.  "  C'est  un  mal  peu  reel  pour  la  Societe  civile,  que 
d'ignorer  la  propriete  de  plusieurs  termes ;  mais  il  n'est  point  de  pro- 
fession, oil  la  justesse  d'esprit  ne  soit  d'un  usage  merveilleux ;  et  c'est 
une  grande  preparation  pour  I'acquerir,  que  de  s'accodtumer  de  bonne 
heure  a  parler  des  choses  de  son  ressort  selon  les  notions  qu'un  bon 
Dictionnaire  en  fournit." 


70  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

precision  and  fullness.^^  Bayle  recommends  attention,  in  writing 
a  dictionary,  to  archaic  words  and  their  meanings  as  estabhshed 
by  passages  from  the  old  writers,  to  dialects,  and  to  etymology.** 
He  also  speaks,  in  this  same  Preface,  of  the  usefulness  of  dic- 
tionaries and  the  favor  with  which  they  are  received  in  his 
own  day,  and  he  claims  that  the  French  have  done  particularly 
good  work  in  dictionary-making,  although  their  temperament 
would  seem  to  fit  them  for  work  that  required  more  esprit  and 
less  patience.-** 

In  critical  editions  and  in  the  commentaries  of  savants  on  the 
writings  of  the  ancients  Bayle  insists  again  on  exactness  and 
attention  to  details.  He  approves  highly  of  the  effort  to  have 
a  text  that  is  reliable  and  correct.  The  numberless  commen- 
taries on  text  variants,  which  resulted  from  the  revival  of 
knowledge  in  Western  Europe  and  the  consequent  attention  to 
Latin  and  Greek,  are  for  the  most  part  unsatisfactory.  It  re- 
quires much  discrimination  to  be  a  good  commentator.   An  editor 


"  O.  D.  IV.  192 :  "  Un  Dictionnaire  est  un  de  ces  livres  qui  peuvent 
etre  ameliorez  a  Tinfini  .  .  .  ;"  cf .  D.  IV.  367,  Camden,  D ;  O.  D. 
I.  60,  iii,  O.  D.  IV,  688. 

^O.   D.   IV.   192,  3. 

*"  O.  D.  IV.  188,  9.  Bayle  cites  Robert  and  Henri  Estienne  and  Du 
Cange   as  excellent  lexicographers. 

For  another  reference  to  Furetiere's  Dictionary  cf.  O.  D.  IV.  801.  Cf. 
the  remark :  "  II  seroit  done  necessaire,  qu'il  y  eut  des  explications  de 
toutes  sortes  de  mots  dans  cette  espece  d'Ouvrages ;  f  aute  de-quoi,  il 
faut  passer,  en  lisant,  sur  des  mots,  sans  les  entendre." 

The  Dictionary  of  Furetiere  is  quite  different  from  that  of  the  Acad- 
emy. The  object  of  the  latter,  as  well  as  of  the  Academy  itself,  is 
to  polish  the  French  language  so  as  to  make  it  a  ready  instrument 
for  literary  expression.  Furetiere  on  the  other  hand  pays  much  more 
attention  to  general  information  concerning  the  terms  used  in  the  various 
arts  and  sciences  and  professions ;  the  question  whether  a  term  is  poll 
or  not  does  not  especially  concern  him.  Bayle  expresses  the  hope  that 
the  Academy  will  cease  to  be  antagonistic  to  Furetiere's  Dictionary, 
though  he  grants  that  Furetiere  indulged  in  severe  satire  against  its 
members.  O.  D.  IV.  191,  2.  The  above  characterization  of  Furetiere's 
Dictionary  applies  only  to  the  first  edition,  as  the  editor  of  Bayle's 
CEuvrcs  Diverses  explains  in  a  note  (p.  191).  Bayle  speaks  of  the  slow- 
ness with  which  the  Academy  produced  its  Dictionary,  in  one  case, 
O.  D.  IV.  191,  to  excuse  this,  in  another,  O.  D.  II.  i6g,  to  blame  it. 
Cf.  O.  D.  TV.  756,  Reflex,  sur  un  Imprimc,  etc;  Bayle  says  of  the 
Academy  Dictionary :    "  il  vogue  a  pleines  voiles  vers  rimmortalite." 


Scholarship  7 1 

must  be  familiar  with  the  original  manuscripts,  must  give  a  full 
account  of  all  previous  textual  criticism,  and  must  add,  finally, 
the  results  of  iiis  own  study.''"  The  notes  of  an  editor  may  be 
most  helpful  in  explaining  the  meaning  of  a  text.  In  the  case 
of  an  edition  of  Cicero's  orations  Bayle  praises  the  plan  of 
placing  at  the  head  of  each  an  account  of  the  circumstances 
under  which  the  oration  was  delivered,  the  time,  the  place,  the 
cause,  the  judgment  given,  and  an  outline  of  the  oration,  with 
the  reasoning,  the  proofs,  and  the  various  figures  of  speech, 
pointed  out.'"  Details  of  this  kind  about  the  circumstances 
under  which  a  text  was  written,^-  explanations  of  the  meaning 
of  the  text,^^  citations  from  other  authors  whose  remarks  have 
some  relation  to  the  text — this  kind  of  information  is  worth 
having.^*  The  dedications  and  prefaces  which  accompany  vari- 
ous editions  should  be  given. ^* 

But  Bayle  objects  to  the  useless  digressions  which  sometimes 
overwhelm  editor  and  reader  alike. ^'^  Whatever  is  his  zeal  and 
enthusiasm  for  fine  details,  he  does  not  forget  to  be  practical, 
and  he  insists  that  a  text  must  be  prepared  with  a  view  to 
the  public  for  whom  it  is  destined.  Extreme  niceties  of  erudi- 
tion have  their  place,  but  not  in  a  commentary  prepared  for  the 
general  reader  or  for  the  education  of  youth.  To  the  average 
reader  a  multitude  of  minutiae  concerning  text  variants  have 
little  value;  he  skips  them."  Historical  and  geographical  notes 
and  grammatical  comments  which  bring  out  the  force  of  the 
author's  expressions  are  more  useful  to  the  general  public.^® 
In  the  case  of  editions  which  are  being  prepared  for  young 
people  care  should  be  taken  to  make  clear  the  constructions  used 
in  the  text,  to  explain  the  points  which  are  simple  to  the  savant 
but  which  puzzle  the  novice.     Bayle  advocates  paraphrasing  a 


'"O.  D.  I.  54.  vii. 

=•  O.  D.  I.  169,  vii. 

*=€£.  O.  D.  I.  155,  xiv. 

«  Cf .  O.  D.  I.  634. 

"Cf.  O.  D.  I.  175.  X,  481.  xi;    D.  IV.  369,   Camden.  E. 

**  D.  I.  444.  Alexander  ab  Alexandre,  F;  cf.  D.  II.  72,  Ancillon,  D. 

"O.  D.  I.  169,  vii. 

"O.  D.   I.  241,  iii;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  67,  iv. 

■^O.  D.  I.  241,  iv;    O.   D.   I.   67,   iv. 


7  2  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

Latin  text  so  that  the  constructions  and  word  order  may  not 
overwhelm  a  young  student. ^^ 

Translation  calls  for  the  same  attention  to  accuracy.  A  trans- 
lator must  try  to  be  absolutely  correct,  and  must  produce  a 
faithful  and  clear  reproduction  of  the  original  text.''"  He 
should  himself  add  nothing.  Any  personal  comments  must  be 
placed  elsewhere.*^  Our  author  has  no  sympathy  for  a  trans- 
lator whose  religious  zeal  moves  him  to  change  the  text  where 
it  reflects  discredit  on  his  particular  faith.'*^  He  approves  highly 
of  a  translator  of  poetry  who  is  able  to  be  scrupulously  accurate 
and  yet  produce  a  work  pleasing  and  free  from  the  dryness  that 
usually  characterizes  a  literal  version.*^  Here,  and  in  various 
cases,  Bayle  is  impressed  with  the  difficulties  involved.'*^ 


'"O.  D.  I.  142.  iv. 

It  is  quite  possible  to  have  too  much  cleverness  and  too  much  learning 
to  be  a  good  commentator.  Scaliger  is  an  example  of  this :  "  a  force 
d'avoir  de  I'esprit,  il  trouvoit  dans  les  Auteurs  qu'il  commentoit,  plus 
de  finesse  et  plus  de  genie  qu'ils  n'en  avoient  effectivement ;  et  sa  pro- 
fonde  litterature  etoit  cause  qu'il  voyoit  mille  rapports  entre  les  pensees 
d'un  Auteur,  et  quelque  point  rare  d'antiquite  ...  les  Commentaires 
qui  viennent  de  lui,  sont  pleins  de  conjectures  hardies,  ingenieuses  et  fort 
sgavantes ;  mais  il  n'est  gueres  apparent  que  les  Auteurs  ayent  songe  a 
tout  ce  qu'il  leur  fait  dire."  O.  D.  I.  67,  iv ;  cf.  O.  D.  II.  527;  D.  II. 
64,  Anchise,  E :  "Si  les  anciens  ecrivains  revenaient  au  monde,  ils  seraient 
bien  etonnes  de  voir  dans  leurs  livres  tant  de  choses  auxquelles  ils  ne 
songerent  jamais;"  cf.  O.  D.  I.  143,  v:  On  the  other  hand  the  com- 
mentator does  not  alwrays  give  his  author  the  credit  that  is  due  for  the 
excellence  of  some  thought. 

*''D.  II.  31,  Anaxagoras,  C;  D.  II.  445,  Arsinoe  (2),  C;  D.  IX.  154, 
Leon  X.  K;  O.  D.  III.  517.  Cf.  D.  XII.  332,  Priole,  G;  O.  D.  IV.  177: 
Bayle   criticises  particular  translations  for  inaccuracy. 

"  D.  III.  451,  Bion,  H. 

"  D.  IX.  574,  Luther,  BB.     Bayle  criticises  a  Protestant. 

"O.  D.  I.  170,  viii.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  633;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  375:  Approval  of 
a  translation  of  works  of  Demosthenes,  Plato  and  Cicero  where  dryness 
is  avoided. 

"  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  141,  ii ;  Especially:  "II  ne  suffit  pas  de  sgavoir  les 
Langues  pour  bien  traduire,  il  faut  aussi  sgavoir  les  choses:"  cf. 
D.  XIV.  269,  Tullie,  L:  "  il  est  extremement  difficile  de  bien  traduire; 
car  quoiqu'on  prenne  les  expressions  de  I'original  dans  le  sens  le  plus 
vraiscmljiable,  on  ne  laissc  pas  quelquefois  de  s'cgarer :  la  coniiaissance 
de  cent  faits  particuliers  est  necessaire  pour  choisir  le  seni  veritable." 
Cf.  D.  XII.  528,  9,  Ryer  (2),  A.  B. 


Scholarship  7  3 

Indeed,  exact  scholarship  in  any  of  these  fields  is  as  difficult 
as  it  is  desirable ;  the  most  learned  writers  like  Scaligcr,  Vossius 
and  Saumaise,  make  slips.*"'  Often  the  mistakes  of  clever  men 
are  enough  to  discourage  a  scholar.*" 

Bayle  makes  several  remarks  as  to  the  reasons  which  make 
research  work  so  complicated  and  uncertain.  Many  mistakes 
come  from  studying  the  past  without  sufficient  documentary 
evidence.  A  modern  instance  brings  out  strikingly  the  compli- 
cations liable  to  arise  in  parallel  cases.  In  speaking  of  a  book 
which  claimed  to  give  the  true  story  of  the  loves  of  Gregory 
\'II,  Riciielicu  and  others,  Bayle  suggests  what  might  happen 
if  between  the  eighteenth  and  twenty-eighth  centuries  a  recur- 
rence of  the  Dark  Ages  should  be  followed  by  another  Renais- 
sance of  letters.*'  Perhaps  this  book,  which  is  full  of  lies,  would 
be  preserved,  while  a  thousand  useful  ones  disappeared.  It 
would  be  discovered  and  made  to  pass  for  reliable  evidence  of 
the  amours  of  these  gentlemen. 

On   a  ete  le  dupe  d'une  fois  de  pareils  ouvrages :  on   le   sera   apparem- 
ment  dans  les  siecles  a  venir.  Patience."" 

In   another   case   Bayle  suggests   what   might  occur  if   French 

''D.  II.  33,  Anaxagoras,  D;  D.  II.  264,  Archelaus  (3),  F;  cf.  D.  II. 
95,  Andrinople,  B ;  D.  II.  132,  Antoine,  B ;  D.  V.  453,  Demetrius  Magnes, 
A;  D.  XV.  226.     Dissert,  cont.  le  Pro  jet. 

The  mistakes  of  great  scholars  offer  some  consolation  to  lesser  lights. 
D.  XV.  227,  Dissert,  cont..  le  Projet,  II.  Indeed,  great  scholars  are  espe- 
cially liable  to  error.  D.  XV.  227,  Dissert,  cont.  le  Projet,  II;  D.  III. 
212,  Bautru,  B.  Among  other  reasons  for  this  Bayle  suggests  that  the 
very  bigness  of  these  superior  geniuses  makes  them  ignore  details.  He 
cites  Longinus  and  others  on  the  subject:  O.  D.  II.  170,  i. 

''D.  IX.  541,  Lupercales,  C. 

On  the  mistakes  of  savants  cf.  D.  XV.  131,  Dissert,  sur  le  Livre  de 
J.  B.  VII.  "Les  savans  sont  d'etranges  gens;  ils  courent  apres  les  choses 
eloignees  et  qui  les  fuient,  et  laissent  ce  qu'ils  ont  comme  sous  la  main." 
Cf.  D.  III.  399,  Beze,  E:  Bayle  says,  of  the  complaints  of  those  who 
object  to  the  corrections  made  in  successive  editions  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment of  Beze :  "  se  facher  de  cela,  c'est  se  facher  contre  la  nature,  qui  a 
voulu  que  nos  lumieres  fussent  tres-bornees,  et  qu'elles  s'augmentassent 
peu  a  peu." 

"  D.  VII.  254,  Gregoire  VII.  T.  Cf.  D.  II.  497,  Athenee  (2)  :  "  C'est 
ainsi  qu'il  y  a  tel  compilateur,  dont  notre  siecle  ne  fait  nul  cas,  qui  serait 
admire  d'ici  a  mille  ans,  s'il  arrivait  dans  la  republique  des  lettres  les 
memes  revolutions  qui  ont  fait  perir  la  plupart  des  livres  des  anciens 
auteurs  grecs  et  romains;"  i.e.  supposing  this  compiler's  work  were  pre- 


74  T^^^  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

should  meet  the  fate  of  Latin,  and  if  French  Hterature  should 
go  through  a  period  of  obscurity  as  the  Latin  did  in  the  Dark 
Ages.*^  Suppose  that  among  the  works  preserved  should  be 
the  writings  of  Boileau  and  the  expression  in  the  Lutrin*^  le 
moelleux  Ahelly,  where  the  epithet  refers  to  a  book,  Medulla 
Thcologica,  written  by  Abelly.  Suppose  this  latter  book  were 
destroyed  and  its  existence  forgotten.  What  chimerical,  ex- 
travagant comments  the  critics  would  hazard  as  to  the  meaning 
of  the  adjective  in  this  application!  Doubtless  some  one  would 
see  in  moelleux  Ahelly  an  allusion  to  the  fact  that  Abel  ofifered 
up  to  the  Lord  the  fat  of  the  firstlings  of  his  flock. ^'^  Evidently 
the  lack  of  documents  is  liable  to  be  the  source  of  innumerable 
errors  in  scholarly  work.  Another  cause  of  mistakes  is  poor 
memory.  Memory  is  most  important  in  the  Republic  of  Let- 
ters,^^  but  it  behooves  savants  to  be  careful  how  they  rely  on  it.^^ 
The  difficulties  of  scholarship  are  particularly  evident  in  the 
contentions  which  come  up  among  savants.  None  are  harder 
to  settle.^^  Not  only  the  first  arguments  of  each  side  must  be 
studied,  but  the  successive  answers  which  accumulate  as  one 
man  replies  to  the  other.  In  the  rebuttals  it  is  likely  enough 
that  a  disputant  will  condemn  what  is  good  and  fail  to  censure 
what  is  bad,  so  that  new  errors  are  added  to  those  already 
existing.  Sometimes  it  is  possible  for  a  critic  to  discover,  at 
the  very  beginning,  the  essential  errors  in  such  a  dispute,  some- 
times the  truth  escapes  him  altogether.  The  matter  may  be 
compared  to  hunting: 

a    la    verite    ceux    qui    cherchent    les    fautes    des    auteurs    trouvent    bien 


served  from  the  general  destruction  of  books.  Therefore,  do  not  despise 
compilers,  says  Bayle. 

^^D.  I.  69,  Abelly,  A.  Cf.  D.  V.  521,  Dinant,  A  :  on  a  third  case  where 
such  mistakes  might  arise. 

^-Lutrin,  Chant  IV. 

^"  Cf .  Genesis,  IV,  4. 

"  D.  VII.  210,  Gratarolus,  B.  The  most  agreeable  feature  of  erudition, 
says  Bayle,  in  one  place,  O.  D.  I.  300,  is  to  be  able  to  remember  things. 
But  the  pleasure  is  fleeting;  a  man's  memory  weakens  as  he  grows  older. 
On  the  tremendous  memory  of  Montmaur  and  the  advantage  it  gave 
him  in  conversation,  cf.  D.  X.  506,  Montmaur,  G. 

""  D.  XIV.  485,  Urgulanilla,  A;  cf.  D.  I.  444,  Alexander  ab  Alexandro, 
E. 

"'D.  XV.  228,  Dissert,  rout.  Ic  Projct.  HI;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  no,  v. 


Scholarship  75 

quelquefois  la  bete  toute  tuee  ou  aux  abois,  mais  .  .  .  ils  la  trouvent 
aussi  quelquefois  qui  donne  le  change,  ou  qui  csquive  le  coup,  ou  mcme 
qui  se  defend  encore  vigourcuscment  quoique  percee  de  cent  traits.  Lts 
chicanes  que  la  vanite  et  la  mauvaise  honte  inspircnt  aux  ecrivains 
critiques,  ne  rendent  que  trop  juste  I'application  de  la  metaphore. 
Cependant  cela  nous  montre  qu"il  ne  suffit  pas  de  savoir  copier,  pour  aller 
heureusement  a  cette  chasse,  et  que  I'abondance  des  materiaux  n'empcche 
pas  que  la  construction  de  I'edificc  ne  coiite  beaucoup." 

Although  such  stress  is  laid  on  the  need  of  exactness  and 
completeness  in  all  scholarly  efforts  and  although  Bayle  urges 
so  vigorously  that  the  difficulties  in  the  way  be  overcome,  it 
must  be  added  that  he  does  not  think  this  kind  of  accuracy, 
by  itself,  enough  to  constitute  an  eminent  scholar.  He  recog- 
nizes two  kinds  of  savants.  There  are  some  fitted  by  their 
memory,  their  patience  and  their  industry,  to  accumulate  vast 
compilations  of  fact.^"'  This  type  of  cruditiis,  whose  work  is 
distinguished  more  than  anything  else  by  its  accuracy,  has  indeed 
a  place.  But  there  is  a  higher  order  of  scholarship  represented 
by  men  of  superior  critical  faculties  who  can  grasp  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  things  and  who  are  capable  of  exploring 
new  fields.^®  Bayle  refers  to  the  ancient  scholiasts  as  being 
commendable  only  for  the  material  found  in  their  commen- 
taries.^' The  German  men  of  science  are  praiseworthy  both 
for  their  industr}'  and  their  genius.'® 

Aside  from  this  varied  treatment  of  the  question  of  accuracy 
and  completeness,  there  is  one  other  feature  of  scholarship  on 
which  Bayle  dwells  especially.  This  is  the  matter  of  the  rela- 
tions of  savants  among  themselves.     How  shall  they  treat  each 


**  D.  XV.  229,  Dissert,  cottt.  le  Pro  jet,  III.  Bayle  goes  on,  in  the  fol- 
lowing section,  229-30,  IV,  to  explain  the  great  usefulness  of  a  work 
like  his  Dictionary,  where  these  disputes  are  carefully  studied  and  a 
judgment  rendered  for  the  benefit  of  the  reader. 

"Cf.  D.  XV.  223,  Dissert,  cout.  le  Projet;  D.  XV.  375.  Prcf.  de  M. 
Bayle. 

""D.  I.  453,  Allatius;  D.  X.  215,  Marca.  N:  D.  XII.  495,  Reinesius. 
Cf.  O.  D.  IV.  131;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  189,  ix:  Bayle  commends  a  chemist  who 
seeks  the  principles  of  chemical  phenomena  rather  than  devoting  himself 
to  long  series  of  experiments  without  reference  to  causes. 

"O.  D.   I.  505. 

■^O.  D.  I.  389.  iv:  cf.  D.  II.  414,  Arnauld  (4).  O:  Bayle  speaks  of 
the  activity  of  the  savants  of  Leipsic,  and  says  the  city  may  be  named 
the  Athens  of  Germany. 


76  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

other  in  the  disputes  which  are  bound  to  arise  concerning  various 
points  of  erudition?  In  point  of  fact,  they  treat  each  other 
rather  shamefuhy.  Wrangling  is  very  common  among  men  of 
learning.  Their  hves  and  their  writings  give  evidence  of  in- 
numerable quarrels,  characterized  by  spite,  jealousy,  calumny 
and  other  evil  passions. ^^  It  is  rare  for  them  to  engage  in  a 
dispute  without  maltreating  each  other.  They  may  be  gentle- 
manly at  the  start,  but,  in  any  case,  they  soon  change,  they 
let  loose  their  malice,  and  attack  each  other  with  more  and  more 
bitterness  as  the  dispute  proceeds.*^"  There  may  be  various  rea- 
sons for  this  violence  which  is  so  characteristic. 

N'est-ce  pas  que  le  temperament  qui  fait  les  grands  hommes  est  semblable 
a  ces  terres  fortes,  qui  produisent  de  bonnes  et  de  mechantes  herbes 
abondamment?  Ou  bien  n'est  ce  pas  que  la  bile  la  plus  seche  forme 
la  vivacite  de  I'esprit,  et  que  les  veilles  et  les  meditations,  par  lesquelles 
on  devient  grand  homme,  echauffent  extremement  les  humeurs?  Ou 
enfin  n'est-ce  pas  que  les  grands  hommes  connoissent  parfaitement  ce 
qu'ils  valent,  s'imaginent  que  les  moindres  injures  qu'on  leur  fait  sont 
des  crimes  qu'il  faut  chatier  exemplairement,  afin  d'aprendre  au  Public 
a  honorer  le  veritable  merite?"^ 

Besides  these  possible  reasons  it  is  certainly  true,  Bayle  adds, 
that  those  who  lavish  praise  on  savants  increase  their  self 
admiration  and  incline  them  to  resent  contradiction  all  the  more 
vigorously. *^^ 

It  is  a  pity  that  men  of  letters  cannot  rid  themselves  of  this 
vice.*^  The  results  are  deplorable.  The  world  becomes  dis- 
gusted with  learning.  It  is  reasonable  to  expect  that  much  read- 
ing and  erudition  will  give  a  man  balance,  will  tend  to  free 
him  from  the  faults  and  prejudices  which  induce  a  quarrelsome 
spirit.  But  experience  shows  that  no  such  desirable  elYect  is 
obtained.*^     Moreover  the  anxiety  to  find  mistakes  in  the  work 


'^  D.  XII.  497,  Reinesius;  cf :  "II  semble  que  les  gens  de  lettres  sont 
ceux  qui  conspirent  davantage  contre  leur  propre  repos  et  contre  celui 
de  leur  prochain;"  cf.  D.  III.  481,  Blondel  (2),  D:  on  quarrelsome  pro- 
fessors; cf.  D.  XV.  226,  Dissert,  cont.  le  Pro  jet;  O.  D.  II.  320,  xx. 

"O.   D.  I.  266-7. 

"  O.  D.  II.  187-8.  On  the  vanity  of  men  of  learning,  which  Bayle 
deplores,  cf.  D.  V.  196,  Cimon,  D ;  O.  D.  I.  304,  ii.  327;  O.  D.  III.  651-2. 

"•^D.  VII.  79,  Gifanius,  E;  D.  III.   157,  Basine.  F. 

""  D.  XII.  497-8,  Reinesius.  B.  Bayle  adds  that  there  is  nothing  more 
difficult  to  obtain  than  a  well-balanced  mind. 


Scholarship  7  7 

of  an  adversary  is  a  dangerous  guide ;  it  engenders  other  mis- 
takes.''^ And  the  disputes  of  savants  make  the  general  public 
doubt  whether  accurate  knowledge  is  to  be  obtained.''"' 

Yet  these  disputes  have  a  very  definite  advantage,  provided 
they  are  not  carried  on  in  a  spiteful  fashion.  Bayle  believes, 
for  his  part,  that  the  discussions  and  ditiferences  of  learned 
men  do  add  to  the  general  sum  of  knowledge.""  A  careful 
examination  of  facts  as  they  are  brought  out  in  a  dispute,  leads 
to  the  discovery  of  mistakes,  and  that  is  worth  while.'"'  IjUt  of 
course  it  is  essential  that  these  disputes  be  conducted  in  a  gen- 
tlemanly spirit.  Bayle  has  words  of  praise  for  savants  when 
they  enter  into  tlieir  discussions  without  malice.'"''* 

To  be  a  scholar  and  a  gentleman  is,  then,  in  Bayle's  opinion, 
a  noble  ambition.  Scholarship  does  not  bring  very  practical 
results,  but  it  is  inspiring  to  be  a  seeker  of  Truth  for  Truth's 
sake,  and  man's  inclinations  in  that  direction  are  to  be  encour- 
aged. The  individual  who  sets  out  on  such  a  career,  who  seeks 
to  make  himself  a  savant,  has  no  easy  task.  But  if  he  is  suc- 
cessful he  will  find  himself  a  member  of  a  dignified  and  valu- 
able profession. 

*"  D.   I.  536,   Amphiaraus.   B. 

"O.  D.  I.  223. 

"*  Cf .  O.  D.  I.  L.  38,  xxi :  Bayle  refers  to  the  benefit  of  intercourse 
among  men  of  letters;  O.  D.  I.  L.  37;  O.  D.  I.  L.  74:  A  spirit  of  con- 
tradiction is  to  be  recommended  in  schools  and  helps  train  thinkers,  but 
in  other  places  it  is  not  good  taste;  D.  II.  577,  Aureolus,  B;  Gigas,  9. 

"  O.  D.  I.  190,  X.    Apropos  of  a  botanical  discussion.    Cf .  O.  D.  I.  299. 

""O.  D.  I.  19,  71,  vi.  302,  507,  ii;  cf.  D.  II.  264-5,  Archelaus  (3),  F; 
D.  III.  157,  Basine,  F;  D.  XI.  553,  Pereira.  D;  D.  XIII.  54S,  Suetone 
(2),  A;  O.  D.  I.  185,  iv;  O.  D.  I.  438,  9;  D.  XV.  233-5,  Dissert,  cont. 
le  Projet,  VI.  Bayle  explains  the  moderation  which  shall  characterize 
his  criticisms  in  the  Dictionary;  D.  XV.  243-4,  Dissert,  cont.  le  Projet, 
IX :  Bayle  states  that  he  will  criticise  all  authors  with  equal  freedom 
and  moderation,  regardless  of  their  nationality  or  religion;   Gigas  88-9. 

Bayle  states  that  the  violence  of  authors  is  more  excusable  when  they 
write  in  Latin  than  when  they  write  in  French.  He  suggests  several 
reasons  for  the  fact.  Those  who  write  in  Latin  are  as  a  rule  men  shut 
up  in  their  studies  and  not  polished  by  contact  with  the  world  nor  by 
reading  the  modern  languages.  They  catch  the  spirit  of  Latin  litera- 
ture, which  is  so  abundjmt  in  invectives.  Furthermore  an  opprobrious 
epithet  in  Latin  does  not  bring  up  the  same  vivid  associations  that  the 
equivalent  in  the  living  language  would  arouse.  O.  D.  II.  201-2,  xii, 
xiii. 


VIII 

STYLE 

Style  does  not  impress  the  editor  of  the  Nouvelles  as  a  matter 
deserving  special  stress.  He  has  a  few  precepts  to  advocate, 
and  insists  with  some  energy  on  the  need  of  attention  to  clear- 
ness and  to  correctness.  Style  for  style's  sake,  however,  means 
nothing  to  him.  Apropos  of  his  own  writings  he  testifies  to 
the  efforts  he  makes  to  avoid  negligence  in  certain  details  of 
composition,^  but  he  owns  that  he  is  inclined  to  pay  more  atten- 
tion to  the  reasoning  than  to  the  expression : 

j'avoue  ingenuement  que  j'ai  toujours  eu  plus  de  soin  de  devenir  capable 
de  bien  raisonner,  que  d'apprendre  a  bien  parler     .      .      ." 

He  suggests  several  times  that  there  are  cases  where  the  excel- 
lence of  the  material  found  in  a  book  may  excuse  the  poor 
form  in  which  it  is  presented.^ 

Since  he  has  such  a  point  of  view  it  is  not  to  be  expected 
that  Bayle  will  sympathize  with  those  who  go  to  extremes  in 
polishing  and  correcting  their  compositions.  A  reasonable 
amount  of  care  may  be  praiseworthy,  he  says,  but  there  is  a 
limit  to  the  efforts  a  writer  should  make;  he  must  not  be  too 


^  D.  XVI.  6,  Prcf.  de  la  i<?  Ed. 

■  O.  D.  II.  5.  Cf.  Gigas,  78:  "jc  connois  que  mon  stile,  et  ma  com- 
position sont  tout  a  fait  irregulieres."  Cf.  supra,  p.  2S,  n.  4,  ref.  to 
the  letter  published  by  Gigas,  pp.  74-85. 

'O.  D.  I.  91;  O.  D.  I.  361,  xi;  cf.  D.  VII.  91-2.  Glaphyra  (2),  C. 

It  might  be  supposed  from  certain  remarks  of  Bayle  that  he  would  not 
think  it  worth  while  to  strive  for  a  style  that  is  individual  and  dis- 
tinctive, for  he  speaks  several  times  as  if  he  were  not  inclined  to  admit 
the  existence  of  such  a  thing.  One  cannot  deduce  from  characteristics 
of  style  the  identity  of  an  author,  for  different  writers  compose  in  the 
same  way,  and  the  same  writer  often  changes  his  style.  Cf.  D.  IX. 
142,  Leon  ler,  F;  O.  D.  II.  643-4;  O.  D.  II.  688-9.  Moreover,  a  young 
writer  is  apt  to  mold  his  style  according  to  the  hooks  he  reads.  O.  D. 
IV.  758.  But  these  remarks  are  made  in  connection  with  argiiiiiciils 
de  circonstancc  and  have  slight  value. 


Style  79 

particular  and  strive  and  strain  for  a  long  time  over  the  writing 
of  a  few  pages. 

Les   execs    qui   se    comniettent   en   cela   sont   trcs-blamables,   ct   un    joug 
qui  reduit  quelquefois  la  plume  a  une  espcce  de  stcrilite.* 

if  authors  of  little  or  no  ability  should  observe  the  maxim 
that  a  writing  is  to  be  kept  in  one's  cabinet  for  nine  years,  they 
would  do  well,  but  such  a  precept  in  the  case  of  a  clever  man 
is  undesirable.  The  public  is  liable  to  be  deprived  of  books 
which,  if  written  more  easily  and  with  less  perfection,  would 
still  be  excellent,  when  penned  by  the  hand  of  a  great  author. 
And  tlic  author  harms  himself.  He  may  polish  and  repolish 
and  labor  to  attain  a  form  that  is  impeccable  until  he  becomes 
tired  and  disgusted.  Then  he  throws  aside  the  work,  and  robs 
himself  of  the  glor}'  he  migiit  have  had  in  publishing  a  book, 
not  perhaps  above  reproach,  but  certainly  of  value.  Moreover, 
it  is  possible  to  reach  a  point  where  further  efforts,  instead  of 
tending  towards  perfection,  take  from  the  vigor  and  richness 
of  style.^  It  is  also  true  that  an  author's  style  may  bear  too 
clear  evidence  of  the  fact  that  writing  is  hard  work  for  him.^ 
Clearness  is  the  stylistic  feature  dwelt  upon  with  the  most 
insistence.     A  writer  must  be  careful  about  the  general  plan  of 

*D.  X.  178,  Malherbe,  G. 

Ci.  D.  I.  394,  Alciat,  A :  "  qu'il  y  a  des  gens  qui,  a  force  de  travailler 
a  etre  de  bons  auteurs,  demeurent  toujours  prives  de  la  qualite  d'auteur." 
The  emphasis  is  not  on  style  in  this  case :  the  remark  is  made  apropos 
of   a  controversial   writing. 

'  D.   IX.  251-4,  Linacer,  F. 

Bayle  quotes  Pliny  the  Younger,  Quintilian  and  others  in  this  connec- 
tion. He  states  that  there  are  many  cases  where  writers  experience  more 
difficulties  with  their  style,  niake  more  changes  and  erasures,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  composition  than  anywhere  else.  An  author  is  apt 
to  take  particular  pains  to  correct  a  new  edition  of  his  work,  but  that 
is  often  peine  perdue,  for  few  people  compare  editions  or  recognize  the 
importance  of  such  corrections. 

Cf.  D.  VTI.  307-11,  Guarini  (2).  G:  Remarks  on  the  practice  of  spend- 
ing too  much  time  on  a  composition.  In  this  note  Bayle  speaks  of  the 
fact  that  certain  authors  who  seem  to  write  with  extreme  facility  have 
only  secured  that  effect  by  painstaking  effort,  and  he  also  mentions 
those  writers  who  are  pleased  that  their  style  should  be  complex  and 
bear  evidence  of  hard  work.  Cf.  D.  XIII.  278,  Silanion,  A:  on  spend- 
ing too  much  time  on  a  composition. 

"Cf.  D.  III.  67,  Balzac  (2);  D.  VII.  308,  Guarini   (2),  G. 


8o  Tlie  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

his  composition ;  the  various  parts  must  be  carefully  dis- 
tinguished, and  yet  must  follow  each  other  smoothly,  in  a 
natural  and  logical  sequence.'  To  secure  this  unity  of  effect 
and  to  avoid  confusion  is  particularly  difficult  in  the  case  of 
an  abridgment.**  Xo  work  perhaps  calls  for  more  good  taste 
and  discernment  than  the  presenting,  in  small  compass,  of  the 
essential  details  of  a  large  book.  It  is  also  hard  to  make  addi- 
tions to  a  composition  and  to  be  sure  that  no  statements  in  the 
main  part  of  the  work  fail  to  harmonize  with  what  follows.® 
Yet  such  difficulties  must  be  overcome. 

\\'hen  the  general  plan  has  been  determined,  the  details  of 
phraseolog}'  demand  attention.  Extreme  care  is  to  be  exercised 
in  the  arrangement  of  relatives  and  their  antecedents,  in  placing 
possessive  pronouns  and  the  like  so  as  to  avoid  all  confusion 
in  meaning.^''  Bayle  indicates  his  approval  when  a  writer  pro- 
duces a  composition  that  is  clean-cut  and  free  from  obscurity ; 
he  is  irritated  when  a  piece  is  marked  by  confusion  and  indis- 
tinctness.^^ He  frequently  censures  turns  of  expression  which 
cause  ambiguity,^'  though  admitting  the  extreme  difficulty  of 
writing  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  the  meaning  absolutely  definite. 
It  is  almost  impossible  for  an  author  to  express  himself  so 
clearly  that  future  generations  will  never  interpret  his  words 
in  different  senses. 


'  a.  D.  XII.  27,  Philistus,  D;  O.  D.  I.  L.  136:  of  narration. 

°D.  I.  Achille,  147,  C;  D.  II.  463,  Artaxata,  A;  D.  II.  470,  Artemidore, 
H;  D.  V.  288,  Conon  (2),  I;  D.  VI.  45.  Drusus  (2),  F;  D.  VII.  316, 
Guebriant,  F;  O.  D.  IV.  195.  Cf.  D.  II.  446,  Arsinoe  (2).  C:  "  Quoi 
qu'il  en  soit,  ni  Justin,  ni  plusieurs  autres  abreviateurs,  ne  savent  pas 
qu'un  abrege  doit  ressembler  aux  pygmees  qui  ont  toutes  les  parties  du 
corps  humain,  mais  chacune  a  proportion  plus  petite  que  celles  d"un 
homme  de  belle  taille." 

"D.  X.  165,  Maldonat,  I;  D.  XVI.  20.  Avert,  stir  la  2C  Ed.  (of  addi- 
tions to  a  dictionary)  ;  O.  D.  III.  7-8:  Bayle  confesses  that  to  incorporate 
additions  into  the  text  of  a  work  instead  of  at  the  end.  and  leave  the 
harmony  of  the  whole  composition  undisturbed,  is  too  difficult   for  him. 

"O.  D.  IV.  723. 

"D.  I.  429,  Aleandre  (2),  B;  D.  III.  307,  Beme.  B;  D.  IV.  216, 
Buchanan,  A.  (Cf.  sub-note  2);  O.  D.  I.  273.  iii ;  O.  D.  I.  284,  iii ; 
O.  D.  I.  308,  v;  O.  D.  I.  429,  ii;  O.  D.  III.  615,  Ixiii. 

"D.  VI.  52.  Drusus  (3).  F;  D.  VI.  171,  Epicure,  C;  D.  VI.  388,  Fan- 
nius.  A;  D.  VII.  130.  Gontaut  (2),  A :  D.  X.  398,  Memnon,  E;  D.  XI. 
20,  Naples  (2),  B;  O.  D.  III.  549,  note  f. 


Style  8 1 

Si  Ton  prevoyait  les  controvcrscs  qui  s'clt-vcrnnt  flans  trois  ou  quatre 
cents  ans,  on  s'cxprimerait  d'unt'  manicrc  plus  precise;  mais  je  ne  sais 
si  les  langucs  fourniraient  autant  dc  tcrmcs  ((u'il  cu  faudrait  pour  utcr 
les  equivoques,  et  pour  obvier  aux  chicanes." 

There  is  no  language  affording  more  opportunity  than  JMcnch 
for  clean-cut,  accurate  expression.  The  clearness  of  French  is 
characteristic.     In  a  letter  to  M.  Ron,  our  author  writes: 

Vous  savez  mieux  que  moi,  que  le  caractere  de  notre  Languc,  ct  ce 
qui  la  distingue  de  toutes  les  autres,  est  une  maniere  nettc,  coulante, 
debarrasscc,  de  ranger  les  mots,  qui  fait  qu'un  Lecteur  ne  balance  point 
a  quui  ii  doit  rapporter  les  Particules  "  qui,"  "  le,"  "  son,"  "  que,"  etc. 
Dans  les  autres  Langues,  on  se  determine  par  la  nature  des  sujets; 
dans  la  notre,  on  epargne  au  Lecteur  cette  recherche :  la  seule  situation 
des  mots,  ou  Ton  evite  deux  antecedens  susceptibles  de  la  mcme  rela- 
tion, fait  juger  de  la  pensee.'* 

Frencii  is  certainly  superior  to  the  ancient  languages  in  this 
matter,  although  here  too  it  is  easy  to  be  lax  and  fall  into 
ambiguity.*''  Latin  and  Greek,  particularly  the  former,  abound 
in  equivocal  expressions,*®  and  there  is  a  similar  lack  of  clear- 
ness in   Italian.*' 

Closely  allied  with  the  question  of  clearness  is  the  matter  of 


"  D.  V.  380,  Dante,  I.  Apropos  of  an  interpretation  of  Dante's  opinions 
in  regard  to  the  papacj'. 

Bayle  suggests  that  common  sense  must  often  come  to  the  help  of 
grammar,  in  questions  of  the  meaning  of  an  expression.  D.  XII.  493, 
Reihing,  D. 

He  also  suggests  that  a  writer's  style  may  be  improved  by  a  careful 
observance  of  the  principles  of  logic,  by  avoiding  confusion  in  the 
reasoning.  In  other  words,  think  clearly  and  you  may  write  clearly. 
D.  V.  501,  Diagoras  (2),  H;  cf.  D.  VI.  24,  Drusille,  A. 

Cf .  O.  D.  I.  177,  i :  A  knowledge  of  philosophy  is  valuable  to  a 
rhetorician,  for  there  is  a  close  relation  between  language  and  the 
workings  of  the  mind. 

For  an  example  of  Bayle's  insistence  upon  absolute  accuracy  in  ex- 
pression, cf.  O.  D.  IV.  722-3. 

"O.  D.  IV.  723;  cf.  D.  I.  146,  Achille,  C;  O.  D.  IV.  190- 1  :  on  the 
excellence  of  French  and  its  widespread  use  in  Europe;  O.  D.  I.  174: 
"la   langue    Franqoise   est   aujourd'hui    dans   sa  perfection     .     .     ." 

"D.  III.  24,  Badius,  K;  D.  IV.  131,  Breze  (2),  A ;  D.  V.  443.  Dejotarus. 
G;  D.  V.  452,  Dellius.  F;  D.  V.  552,  Dolabella,  G;  D.  VI.  273,  Esechiel, 
E;  D.  XIV.   103,  Theon,  B. 

"D.  III.  107,  Barclai  (2),  D;  D.  VII.  248,  Gregoire  VII,  P ;  D.  X. 
320,  Marot,  L;  O.  D.  I.  646. 

"D.  X\.  76,  Zeuxis,  L. 


82  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

conciseness.  A  style  that  is  extremely  condensed  may  result  in 
obscurity.  Bayle  suggests  that  there  is  a  happy  medium.^*  He 
censures  the  excesses  of  modern  writers 

qui  accusent  de  prolixite  tout  auteur  qui  ne  donne  pas  a  deviner  le 
meilleur  de  ses  pensees." 

It  is  more  difficult  to  avoid  obscurity  in  long  sentences  than 
in  short  ones,  but  it  is  a  sign  of  laziness  to  use  always  le  style 
coupe.  Those  who  write  long  periods  and  link  the  parts  together 
properly  can  really  be  more  concise  than  those  who  write  a 
series  of  short  sentences.  Bayle  contrasts  the  conciseness  of 
Cicero  with  the  verbiage  of  Seneca.^** 

In  regard  to  digressions  there  is  again  a  golden  mean.  Un- 
doubtedly a  wTiter  should  not  wander  from  his  subject,  yet 
it  is  quite  possible  to  follow  one  particular  line  with  so  little 
variety  that  the  reader  becomes  exceedingly  bored.  An  occa- 
sional relaxation  from  gravity  of  style,  the  introduction  from 
time  to  time  of  some  detail  which,  though  it  does  not  bear 
directly  on  the  question  at  issue,  is  interesting,  helps  to  make 
the  reader  alert,  and  prevents  him  from  feeling  the  fatigue 
caused  by  a  book  that  is  always  correct,  serious  and  concise; 

un  peu  de  variete  est  necessaire  dans  tous  les  ouvrages  d'esprit  et  Ton 
remarque  que  les  ecrivains  les  plus  reguliers  ne  sont  pas  ceux  qui  se 
font  lire  le  plus  agreablement.^ 

The  rigid  observance  of  the  law  against  digressions  may  pro- 
duce a  book  which  is  superior  as  a  w^ork  of  art,  but  the  reading 
public  will  not  like  it.  Whether  artistic  ideals  or  the  taste  of 
the  public  should  be  followed  Bayle  leaves  an  open  question. -- 

"  D.  VIII.  275,  Hotman,  C:  A  good  writer  prides  himself  on  being 
concise,  but  he  may  go  too   far.     O.  D.   I.  629,  iii. 

"D.  X.  278,  Marie,  C.  Cf.  O.  D.  I.  121,  ii.  Cf.  on  the  other  hand: 
D.  I.  313,  Ajax,  B:  "  Quintus  Calaber  particularise  les  choses  avec  beau- 
coup  plus  d'etendue :  il  est  si  prolixe,  que  ce  seul  endroit  lemoigne  qu'il 
n'etait  pas  un  grand  maitre."  On  conciseness  in  style,  as  to  its  difficulty 
as  well  as  desirability,  cf.  O.  D.  I.  444,  Avertissement.  Bayle  is  speaking 
of  his   own   writing. 

"  O.  D.  IV.  723.  The  example  is  poorly  chosen  if  Bayle  wishes  to 
bring  out  the  difference  between  long  and  short  periods,  for  he  says : 
"  Ciceron  mettroit  dans  une  periode  de  six  lignes,  ce  que  Seneque  dit 
dans  six  pcriodcs  qui  tiennent  chacune  huit  ou  neuf  lignes." 

"D.  XII.  27,  Philistus,  E. 

'^'D.   XII.  27-8,   Philistus,   E.  apropos  of  history;   cf.   D.    XIV.    108-10, 


Style  83 

He  admits  on  various  occasions  that  his  own  writings  abound 
in  digressions  and  are  long-winded.  He  apologizes  for  this,  but 
advances  the  plea  mentioned :  digressions  often  add  to  the  in- 
terest of  a  work  and  divert  the  reader.-^ 

Correctness  is  important.  Accuracy  in  spelling  is  to  be  insisted 
upon.-^  Provincialisms  in  writing  and  in  pronunciation  must  be 
avoided ;-'  it  is  hard  to  do  this,  but  on  the  other  hand  success 
in  the  effort  may  result  in  a  style  that  is  unusually  pure.  Have 
not  Malherbe,  Balzac  and  X'augelas,  who  were  from  the  Prov- 
inces, been  particularly  commendable  as  to  their  pure  speech, 
for  the  very  reason  perhaps  that  they  felt  especially  the  need  of 
care?-"  There  is  such  a  thing  as  too  rigid  adherence  to  the 
tyrannical  precepts  of  grammar,  and  indeed  if  one  submitted  to 
all  the  rules  it  would  be  impossible  to  write  French. 

Les  nouveaux  Grammairiens  Frangois  nous  donnent  des  regies  qu'il  est 
impossible  de  suivre,  et  ils  meriteroient  d'etre  regardez  comme  le  fleau 
des  Auteurs.  Ils  ont  rendu  la  Langue  Frangoise  celle  de  toutes  les 
Langues,  ou  il  est  le  plus  mal-aise  de  bien  ecrire." 

Yet  it  is  good  to  set  a  high  ideal  for  oneself  in  this  matter.-^ 


Theopompe,  E.  F;  O.  D.  I.  L.  136:  on  digressions  of  the  nouvellistes; 
O.  D.  III.  1032,  x;  against  the  digressions  of  a  particular  history. 

"^  O.  D.  III.  4,  9,  10,  158-9.  For  Bayle's  comment  on  the  digressions 
and  prolixity  in  his  own  letters  cf.  O.  D.  IV.  543,  545,  587,  xliii,  596, 
xliv. 

-'  D.  IV.  297,  Cayet,  N ;  O.  D.  I.  L.  69,  83,  liv. 

Bayle  writes  to  his  younger  brother,  O.  D.  I.  L.  38.  xx :  "  J'ai 
remarque  que  vous  innovez  beaucoup  dans  I'ortographe.  Vous  ne  niettez 
par  exemple  aucune  r  aux  infinitifs.  C'est  une  singularite  qu'on  par- 
donne  aux  femmes,  mais  les  Savans  ne  s'en  servient  pas.  lis  attendent 
que  I'usage  ait  regie  peu  a  peu  le  retranchement  des  lettres  superflues. 
II  est  probablement  que  I'ecriture  s'approchera  de  la  prononciation  plus 
qu'elle  n'a  fait  jusqu'ici;  mais  c'est  une  imagination  mal  fondee  de  croire 
qu'on  puisse  jamais  ecrire  comme  Ton  prononce,  et  ceux  qui  en  ont 
fait  la  tentative  se  sont  fait  siflfler." 

=»0.  D.  I.  275,  viii,  305;  O.  D.  I.  L.  69,  83.  liv.  117.  i75- 

*'0.  D.  I.  306. 

•' O.  D.  II.  6.  Cf.  O.  D.  IV.  835.  And  the  best  grammarians  make 
mistakes,  says  Bayle,  apropos  of  a  point  in  Latin :  O.  D.  I.  299. 

='0.  D.  I.  296,  viii. 

Bayle  occasionally  criticises  a  particular  expression  as  incorrect.  Cf. 
D.  V.  145,  Chigi  (2),  note  (28);  O.  D.  I.  38.  xx:  "  Cet  endroit  'Priam 
qui   a  eu  gouverne,'   est   un  barbarisme,  on  ne   parle  pas  ainsi   en   bon 


84  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

The  ornaments  of  style  are  not  by  any  means  as  important 
as  these  other  details.  Bayle  advocates  simplicity,-"  and  objects 
to  the  brilliancy  which  often  serves  to  cover  up  falsehood.""  The 
rules  of  rhetoric  permit  extravagances  and  exaggerations  which 
are  not  tolerated  elsewhere.^^  On  the  various  rhetorical  figures 
there  is  little  comment.     Occasionally  Bayle  refers  to  the  excel- 

frangois;"  O.  D.  I.  L.  96:  "  Vous  vous  servez  du  Verbe  '  rester '  en 
deux  facons  vicieuses,  en  disant  je  n'ai  pas  reste  de  faire  ceci  ou  cela ;" 
etc. 

The  question  of  introducing  obscenities  in  one's  writings  has  some 
relation  to  the  matter  of  pureness  of  style,  and  the  defence  which  Bayle 
publishes  (D.  XV.  324-71)  against  the  attacks  on  those  in  his  Dic- 
tionary includes  one  or  two  remarks  on  this  theme.  He  makes  two 
general  divisions  among  those  writers  who  deal  with  obscenities ;  into 
one  group  he  puts  those  whose  work  is  historical  in  character  and  who 
have  to  touch  upon  the  indecent  from  that  point  of  view;  and  into  a 
second  group  he  puts  all  the  others,  those  who  treat  such  subjects  in 
the  role  of  poets,  novelists  and  what  not.  In  the  case  of  the  second 
group  Bayle  deplores  the  practice,  but  states  that  it  has  so  long  been 
a  habit  for  various  writers  to  dabble  in  these  things  that  there  is  a 
certain  precedent  for  the  indulgence.  The  Dictionary,  of  course,  belongs 
to  the  first  group.  In  a  work  of  this  character  it  is  enough  to  avoid 
expressions  which  shock  common  decency ;  the  daintiness  which  might 
be  expected  in  a  hel  esprit  is  not  called  for  here  (D.  XV.  333).  Bayle 
has  no  sympathy  for  the  delicacy  of  the  purists  who  are  extreme  in 
censuring  this  or  that  expression  as  sale.  As  a  matter  of  fact  they 
are  inconsistent.  The  veiled  expressions  used  by  them  are  often  more 
reprehensible  than  out  and  out  grossierete  (of.  D.  XV.  345;  O.  D.  III. 
1060).  And  both  kinds  appeal  to  the  imagination  with  equal  vividness; 
there  is  no  real  difference  (D.  XV.  350;  cf.  D.  III.  403,  Beze,  H;  D. 
VIII.  145,  Hipparchia,  D.).  Aside  from  any  question  of  grammar  or 
style  it  is  certainly  true  that  a  compiler  of  facts  which  are  historical 
in  character  has  a  right  to  treat  of  obscene  things  when  they  become 
a  part  of  his  subject.  A  multitude  of  writers  have  established  the  pre- 
cedent for  this  privilege.  (Bayle  insists  especially  on  this  right.  Cf. 
D.  I.  204,  Adam,  G;  D.  III.  483-  Blondel  (3),  A;  D.  VIII.  144,  Hip- 
parchia, D;  D.  XII.  385-6,  Quellenec,  E;  D.  XIII.  272-4,  Sforce  (3). 
E;  D.  IX.  186,  Lesbos,  C.  Bayle  adds  here:  "II  faut  s'assujettir  quel- 
quefois  aux  scrupules  de  la  mode;"  O.  D.  I.  L.  181,  cxxxvii ;  O.  D.  IV. 
747-8,  quoted  in  D.  XII.  385-6,  Quellenec.  E;  O.  D.  IV.  754,  xxxiii). 

^"O.  D.  IV.  659;  O.  D.  IV.  726:  on  simplicity  of  style  in  a  history;. 
cf.  supra,  p.  59;  cf.  D.  IV.  195,  Brutus  (3)  :  a  censure  of  the  practice 
of  using  pompous  titles. 

""  D.  IX.  425,  Louis  XI,  V. 

^D.  I.  207,  Adam,  N;  D.  II.  211,  Apulee.  G;  D.  III.  189.  Baudius.  P; 
D.  IV.  489-90,  Cassandre,  F.  (cf.  note  39,  p.  490)  ;  D.  V.  211,  Cyrille,  A. 


Style  85 

lence  of  a  simile  or  metaphor,^-  but  he  admits  that  toutc  com- 
paraison  clochc,'-^'-^  and  he  declares  tiiat  a  long  drawn  out  meta- 
phor is  by  no  means  his  favorite  figure.''*  Irony  may  be  used 
to  good  advantage  where  it  is  undesirable  to  give  a  dispute  the 
dignity  of  serious  discussion.^"'  But  irony  is  frequently  too  bitter 
and  malign  to  be  pleasing.""'  In  the  matter  of  euphony,  French 
presents  a  particular  problem.  To  avoid  inversions  and  trans- 
positions, to  arrange  words  in  a  natural  manner  as  is  done  in 
French,  results  sometimes  in  rhymed  prose.^^  But  this  indeed 
is  preferable  to  the  obscurity  that  the  inverted  construction 
would  cause.^"* 

Concerning  diction  no  rules  are  laid  down.  Bayle  is  impressed 
by  the  inadequacy  of  the  stock  of  words  from  which  a  man  has 
to  choose.  All  languages  are  inadequate;  a  writer  sometimes 
lias  to  use  the  same  word  to  express  two  ideas  which  are  dif- 
ferent and  for  which  there  should  be  separate  names.  Our 
autlior  cites  the  case  of   bon   and  mauvais;  he  objects  to  the 


"^  D.  II.  177.  Apion,  C;  D.  II.  492,  Athenagoras,  E;  D.  V.  61,  Chamier, 
G. 

"  D.  XIV.  171-4.  Timee,  I:  Apropos  of  a  comparison  of  Tinraeus,  cen- 
sured by  Longinus,  Bayle  suggests  that  it  is  enough  for  a  comparison 
to  be  striking;  it  does  not  matter  if  the  parallel  is,  in  some  particulars, 
inexact.  D.  III.  477,  Blondel,  O;  D.  VI.  510,  Fontevraud,  H;  D.  XI. 
541,  Penelope,  H ;  O.  D.  I.  657. 

"O.  D.  IV.  545- 

"O.   D.    I.  497-8. 

"  O.  D.  IV.  545- 

''O.  D.  II.  6;  cf.  D.  XVI.  Pref.  de  la  I^  Ed.  note  19. 

»*0.  D.  I.  122. 

There  are  a  few  remarks  on  elegance  in  the  Latin  language  in  par- 
ticular. It  is  no  easy  matter  to  have  a  good  understanding  of  what 
is  pure  Latin;  years  of  study  and  careful  thought  are  necessary  (O.  D. 
I.  124;  cf.  D.  XIII.  197,  Scioppius,  K;  O.  D.  I.  305;  O.  D.  IV.  189). 
Much  of  the  Latin  written  by  modern  authors  is  barbarous, — though  there 
are  cases  where  writers  have  attained  some  degree  of  excellence  (O. 
D.  I.  L.  ^2,  47-8;  O.  D.  I.  123,  iv.).  Bayle  is  inclined  to  sneer  at  the 
affectation  of  a  pure  Ciceronian  style  when  it  involves  applying  pagan 
names  to  the  details  of  Christian  worship  (D.  III.  298,  Bembus ;  D. 
III.  553,  Bonfinus,  E;  D.  IV.  529,  Castalion,  C).  He  also  suggests  in 
another  case  that  the  delicacy  of  purists  is  excessive  (O.  D.  I.  35o). 
The  Latin  of  state  documents  does  not  have  to  be  written  with  great 
care  and  study,  but  there  should  be  a  certain  elegance  and  clearness 
(O.   D.  IV.  639,  xcv.). 


86  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

necessity  of  using  these  terms  for  physical  as  well  as  for  moral 
qualities.  A  judge  who  is  a  rascal  is  called  a  bad  judge;  an 
artist  who  is  unskillful  is  called  a  bad  artist.  There  should  be 
a  new  set  of  words  for  the  physical  qualities,  and  these  adjec- 
tives should  be  used  of  moral  qualities  only.  Man's  indolence 
and  the  caprices  of  usage  help  explain  this  poverty  of 
vocabulary.^'' 

Since  language  offers  such  an  unsatisfactory  means  of  ex- 
pression, Bayle  would  naturally  oppose  any  practice  which  tends 
even  more  to  narrow  the  limits.  The  inclination  to  shun  all 
archaic  words  comes  in  for  censure  on  this  score.  It  is  a 
mistake  for  an  author  to  try  to  eliminate  from  his  vocabulary 
any  terms  that  he  may  suspect  of  being  antiquated.  It  is  only 
young  writers,  or  those  who  compose  very  slowly,  or  the  people 
at  large  who  know  nothing  about  the  difficulties  of  style,  who 
advocate  such  a  practice ;  men  who  are  obliged  to  write  a  book 
of  any  length,  or  are  under  the  necessity  of  writing  rapidly, 
understand  the  need  of  having  a  language  as  rich  as  possible 
in  the  variety  of  its  expressions.  A  plentiful  supply  of  words 
helps  to  avoid  repetitions,  to  secure  clearness.  Even  the  great 
authors,  like  La  Bruyere,  those  who  have  the  best  command  of 
their  pens,  protest  against  such  a  weakness  of  the  language.'**' 


*°  D.  XII.  460,  Rangouze,  A.  Apropos  of  diction,  cf.  D.  II.  560,  Augus- 
tin,  H :  "  il  n'y  a  point  de  consequence  a  tirer  d'un  siecle  a  un  autre, 
quant  au  sens  des  termes.     L'usage  le  fait  varier  prodigeusement." 

Cf.  D.  IV.  275,  Busiris,  B :  Of  the  exact  meaning  of  words  Bayle 
says :  "  Le  raisonnement  sert  de  peu  de  chose  dans  tout  cela,  parce  que 
la  force  des  mots  depend  toute  de  l'usage.  Or,  pour  bien  connaitre 
l'usage,  il  faut  ou  vivre  avec  ceux  qui  se  servent  d'une  langue,  ou 
consulter  des  auteurs  que  aient  marque  nettement  et  precisement  les  ideas 
qui   repondaient  a  tels  et  tels  mots." 

"  D.  VII.  190,  Gournai,  H.  Bayle  cites  La  Bruyere  {Caracicrcs,  De 
Qnelques  Usages,  No.  73).     Cf.  D.  I.   124,  Accius,  P. 

The  bad  taste  of  those  who  cannot  endure  the  style  of  the  older 
writers  is  deplorable,  says  Bayle,  in  speaking  of  old  French.  The  par- 
ticular beauty  or  force  of  their  productions  is  lost  when  contemporary 
editors  retouch  them  and  correct  the  old-fashioned  words  and  turns 
of  expression.  Even  the  orthography  should  be  maintained ;  exactness 
demands  that.  Readers  should  have  enough  energy  to  study  the  old 
language  until  they  are  familiar  with  it.  D.  XI.  275,  Ossat ;  ibid.  276, 
E;  cf.  D.  XI.  53,  Navarre,  N;  cf.  O.  D.  III.  1023,  iv. 


I 


Style  87 

At  the  same  time,  a  work  crammed  with  archaic  expressions 
that  are  only  to  be  found  in  special  dictionaries  is  utterly  spf)iled. 
A  man  who  indulges  in  this  practice  is  merely  making  a  show 
of  his  erudition.*' 


^'D.  XII.  436-8,  Raynaud.  I. 

Cf.  ref.  to  D.  I.  Accius,  supra,  p.  86.  n.  40.  Mere  Bayle  refers  to  the 
false  taste  of  those  Romans  who  carried  their  preference  for  archaic 
expressions  too  far.  He  also  mentions  certain  Romans  who  praised  the 
older  poets  far  more  than  those  of  the  time,  "  lorsque  le  latin  fut  venu 
a  sa  perfection."  From  both  their  mistakes  the  seventeenth  century  is 
free.  Apropos  of  the  second  one  Bayle  says :  "  On  se  contente  de  mettre 
la  Grece  et  I'ancienne  Rome  au-dessus  de  notre  siecle ;  mais  on  ne 
prcfere  pas  les  harangues  et  les  poesies  du  XV^  et  du  XVJc  siecle  a 
celles  qu'on  fait  aujourd'hui." 


IX 
ANCIENTS  AND  MODERNS 

Our  author  is  awake  to  the  dispute  which  w^as  going  on  in  his 
day  concerning  the  relative  merits  of  the  ancients  and  moderns 
in  literature  and  he  ventures  some  observations  on  the  subject, 
although  he  does  not  definitely  take  sides.  He  refers  only  rarely 
to  the  controversial  writings  which  the  ancient  and  the  modern 
camps  exchanged,  but  he  is  acquainted  with  some  of  them.  He 
is  familiar  with  Charpentier's  Defense  de  la  Langue  Frangoise 
pour  V Inscription  de  I' Arc  de  Triomphe^  and  with  his  De  l' Excel- 
lence de  la  Langue  Frangoise}  There  is  mention,  but  no  impor- 
tant criticism,  of  the  writings  of  Perrault  and  Boileau.^  There 
is  also  an  allusion  to  Desmarets'  censure  of  the  ancients.* 

The  comment  which  is  to  be  found  concerning  the  general 
characteristics  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  nations,  aside  from  the 
question  of  literature,  does  not  indicate  that  Bayle  felt  any 
sympathetic  interest  in  these  peoples.  To  be  sure  he  praises 
their  private  and  civic  probity,  and,  while  he  grants  that  they 
were  not  perfect  and  that  certain  of  their  vices  are  deplorable, 
he  claims  that  even  if  they  did  not  always  practice  true  virtue 
they   understood    its    significance    and   value.^      Their    religious 


'O.  D.  I.   112. 

^  Bayle  reviews  this  book  in  the  Nouvelles.  The  general  tone  of  his 
article  is  favorable,  but  no  final  judgment  is  offered.  O.  D.  I.  112; 
O.   D.    I.    121. 

='D.  II.  169,  Apelles,  K;  D.  VII.  67,  Duaren,  F;  D.  XII.  13,  Phedre, 
D;  O.  D.  IV.  851-2;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  38,  xxi,  a  reference  to  Pantasse 
Reforme;  O.  D.  IV.  730,  clxxxvi :  "  C'est  une  personne  que  j'honore 
d'une  fagon  distinguee,"   (of  Charles  Perrault). 

*  Cf.  infra,  p.  90,  n.  15. 

"Cf.  D.  I.  543,  Amphiaraus,  H;  D.  II.  165,  Apelles.  E;  D.  IV.  186, 
Brutus  (2);  D.  IV.  188,  Brutus  (2),  A;  D.  V.  306.  Cotys,  E;  D.  VI. 
382,  Fabricius,  D;  D.  VI.  386,  Fannia  (2),  A;  D.  VII.  193,  Gramond, 
A;  D.  VII.  274,  Grotius  (2),  C;  D.  IX.  493-4,  Lucrece ;  D.  X.  174, 
Malherbe,  C;  O.  D.  I.  L.  40,  xxii ;  O.  D.  III.  9<56. 


Ancients  and  Moderns  89 

system,  however,  is  absurd,"  and  the  credit  for  their  moral  worth 
does  not  belong  here.^  They  make  their  gods  ridiculous  and 
abominable. "*  The  poets,  who  wrote  such  atrocities  about  the 
gods,  had  no  fear  of  them,  and  by  their  verses  helped  to  diminish 
the  respect  for  these  divinities  among  their  readers."  The  re- 
ligion of  the  ancients  would  seem  even  more  barbarous  if  it 
were  not  adorned  by  the  conceptions  which  ancient  philosophy 
inspired.^"  Their  mytholog>'  and  their  heroic  traditions  are  dis- 
tinguished especially  by  the  hopeless  confusion  of  the  various 
stories,  by  the  way  in  which  the  stories  contradict  each  other 
and  offer  widely  different  tales  of  the  same  characters."  It  is 
strange  that  keen-witted  and  cultured  men  should  have  given 
credence  to  absurd  fables,  yet  with  few  exceptions  the  ancients 
accepted  these  myths,  which  were  merely  the  product  of  the 
ingenuity  of  certain  poets. ^-  Ancient  mytholog}'  has,  for  Bayle, 
no  beauties. 

When  he  speaks  of  ancient  literature  in  general,  and  of  its 


•  D.  I.  262,  Agesipolis,  A ;  D.  IV.  485,  Cassandre,  A ;  D.  V.  203,  Cinyras, 
C;  D.  VII.  520,  525,  Junon,  AA,  DD;  D.  VIII.  528-9,  Jupiter;  D.  X. 
411,  Metella,  A;  D.  X.  418,  Methydre;  O.  D.  III.  308,  Ixxxii ;  O.  D. 
III.  348-51.  cxv. 

It  is  admitted  that  the  ancients'  conception  of  inexorable  deity  driving 
men  on  to  their  fate  was  natural  and  not  unreasonable.  Cf.  D.  VII. 
547-9,  Helene,  Y;   D.  XI.  306,  Ovide.  H. 

'O.  D.  III.  94,  cxlvi;  O.  D.  Ill,  390. 

'  D.  I.  395,  Alcinoe;  D.  IV.  313,  Calenus,  A;  D.  VI.  367-8,  Euripide, 
AA;  D.  VII.  18,  Ganymede,  B;  D.  VII.  546,  Helene,  X;  D.  VII.  81, 
Hercule,  B;   D.  IX.   14,  Lais,  B. 

»0.  D.  III.  381-4. 

'"O.  D.  III.  970. 

"  D.  I.  159,  Achille  (2).  E;  D.  I.  170.  Achillea.  F;  D.  I.  229.  Adonis, 
H;  D.  I.  315,  Ajax  (2)  ;  D.  II.  336,  .\ristee,  C;  D.  VII.  504,  Harpalyce, 
B;  D.  VII.  537,  Helene,  N. 

The  morals  of  the  heroes  and  heroines  who  figure  in  these  stories  are 
deplorable,  declares  Bayle ;  they  are  as  libertine  as  the  heroes  and 
heroines  of  modern  fiction  are  proper.  He  does  not  suggest  any  explana- 
tion as  to  why  the  ancients,  whose  virtue  he  praises  in  some  particu- 
lars, should  tolerate  such  depravity  in  these  characters.  D.  VIII,  156-7, 
Hypsipyle,  C. 

"D.  III.  579-80,  Boree,  G. 

The  Greeks  may  indeed  be  called  children  in  this  regard,  says  Bayle. 
Yet  their  superstitions  are  not  unlike  the  absurd  superstitions  of  Cath- 
olics  in   modern   times. 


90  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

relation  to  the  modern,  his  attitude  is  at  times  friendly  and  at 
times  not.  He  grants  that  the  study  of  the  writings  of  the 
ancients  and  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  languages  is  an  important 
part  in  the  education  of  a  young  man.^^  He  states  that  we  owe 
much  to  the  ancients,  that  the  moderns  cannot  he  credited  with 
any  great  or  delicate  thoughts  which  are  not  to  be  found  in  the 
books  of  the  older  writers.^*  In  speaking  of  Desmarets  and  his 
criticism  of  the  classic  poets  he  declares  that  for  his  part  he  is 
not  against  the  ancients  and  thinks  them,  in  most  cases,  superior.^^ 
But  he  does  not  hesitate  to  question  the  authority  of  the  ancients 
in  matters  of  literature.  He  is  glad  not  to  be  carried  away  by 
extravagant  prejudice  in  favor  of  antiquity: 

je  ne  suis  giieres  malade,  Dieu  merci,  de  cette  grande  prevention  que 
Ton   a  pour  I'Antiquite.^'' 

Many  believe  that  the  ancients  have  written  nothing  which  does 
not  have  superior  merit ;  they  seek  a  hidden  meaning  in  things 
which  seem  flat,  and  which,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  are  so.  Such 
a  point  of  view  is  nonsensical ;  the  ancients  as  well  as  the  moderns 
are  not  impeccable. ^'^ 


'^O.  D.  I.  142,  iv;  O.  D.  I.  L.  22;  cf.  D.  I.  285.  Agricola  (5),  I:  O.  D. 
I.  L.  47-8. 

Bayle  suggests,  in  one  case,  that  the  advantage  of  studying  Greek  and 
Latin  is  in  the  mental  training  of  the  student.  He  adds,  speaking  of 
Latin :  "  Surmontez  la  difificulte  que  vous  trouverez  a  composer,  car  il  y 
a  mille  occasions  ovi  de  pouvoir  faire  des  dissertations,  dcs  amplifications 
et  des  lettres  en  Latin,  fait  passer  sans  autre  preuve  pour  un 
oracle  .  .  ."  O.  D.  L  L.  69.  Cf.  O.  D.  L  178,  iv.  Bayle  advocates 
the  study  of  Greek.  Interest  in  this  heUe  langue  has  declined  far  too 
much. 

'*  D.  V.  295,  Corbinelli,  F.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  in  pointing  out  the 
excellence  of  the  ancients  Bayle  instances  their  metaphysics  and  ethics. 
In  regard  to  these  he  suggests,  apropos  of  Descartes,  that  the  moderns 
are  superior  by  reason  of  their  power  to  select  and  systematize. 

"  O.  D.  I.  L.  60,  XXXV.  Bayle  grants  that  Desmarets  attains  a  certain 
success  in   attacking  the   ancient  poets. 

"O.  D.  IV.  533.  Cf.  D.  III.  572.  Boree;  D.  XIV,  437.  Virgile.  L; 
Gigas,  28. 

"  O.  D.  IV.  536.     Cf .  O.  D.  I.  143,  v. 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  19:  Bayle  refuses  to  give  a  definite  opinion  of  Homer: 
he  mentions  the  differences  of  critics  as  to  the  merits  of  the  Greek, 
and  he  goes  on  to  say:  "On  I'a  traduit  en  Frangois  depuis  peu  fort 
purement,  et  on  lui  a  ote  plusieurs  basscsses,  qui  sont  tout  a  fait  eloignees 


Ancients  and  Moderns  91 

In  the  comparisons  which  Bayle  makes  concerning  the  literary 
efforts  of  the  ancients  and  moderns  in  particular  genres  he  gen- 
erally awards  the  palm  to  his  contemporaries.  He  has  some- 
thing to  say  about  the  poetry  of  the  two  schools,  and  makes  a 
few  remarks  about  other  methods  of  literary  expression. 

The  epic  of  the  ancients  is  far  too  simple  and  naive.  Homer 
was  a  great  genius  and  produced  masterpieces,  but  he  introduced 
into  his  work  elements  that  are  too  common,  too  bourgeois,  ele- 
ments that,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  could  be  tolerated  only 
in  comedy.  Doubtless  if  he  had  lived  in  modern  times  he  could 
have  written  a  faultless  epic,  but  as  it  is,  various  details  of  his 
work  may  be  censured  on  the  score  of  naivete.  It  is  naive  to 
represent  Andromache  as  lamenting,  when  Hector  dies,  that 
little  Astyanax  will  no  longer  eat  sheep  fat  and  marrow  while 
seated  on  his  father's  knee.  It  may  have  been  natural  for 
Andromache  to  say  this,  but  it  destroys  the  dignity  of  the  epic.^^ 
The  dignity  of  the  epic  suffers  again  when  Achilles  is  repre- 
sented as  weeping  at  the  loss  of  Briseis,  his  concubine,  and,  like 
a  little  boy,  carrying  his  tale  of  woe  to  his  mother  for  consola- 
tion." The  conduct  of  Xausicaa  when  Ulysses  presents  himself 
to  her  in  Phaeacia  is  most  ingenuous.^*'    It  is  absurd  that  Phcenix, 


de  DOS  manieres:  mais  tous  ces  soins  n'ont  pas  sauve  le  Prince  des 
Poetes  du  mepris  de  nos  Connoisseurs.  Je  me  garderai  bien  de  dire 
qui  sont  ceux  qui  ont  le  gout  deprave ;  car  je  ne  veux  pas  subir  I'Arret 
terrible  qu'avec  I'approbation  de  la  plijpart  de  nos  Sgavans,  le  jeune 
Casaubon  a  prononce  sur  tous  ceux  qui  n'admirent  pas  Homere ;  '  qui 
Homerum  contemnunt  vix  illis  optari  quidquam  pejus  potest  quam  ut 
fatuitate  sua  fruantur.' "  Bayle's  leanings  seem  evident  enough  in  this 
case.     Cf.  Lenient,  pp.  210,  11. 

O.  D.  II.  202.  xiv.  The  vanity  which  characterizes  the  classic  writers, 
says  Bayle.  offers  a  bad  example  for  the  moderns.  "  Combien  croyez-vous, 
Monsieur,  que  les  Vers  du  troisieme  des  Georgiques,  ou  Virgile  promet 
a  Mantoue  sa  patrie.  et  a  I'Empereur  Auguste.  de  les  immortaliser  par 
ses  Ouvrages,  ont  fait  mentir  de  mechans  Poetes,  qui  ont  dit  a  I'imitation 
de  celui-la,  que  leurs  Vers  dureroient  eternellement?  Parce  qu'Horace 
et  Ovide  ont  dit  que  leurs  Vers  dureroient  plus  que  les  marbres,  et  qu'ils 
resisteroient  a  toutes  les  injures  du  tems,  n'y  a-t-il  pas  eu  une  infinite 
de  Poetes  bons  et  mauvais,  qui  ont  prophetise  eux-memes  I'immortalite 
de  leurs  Poesies."  Bayle  also  refers  to  Cicero  here. 

"  D.  II.  99,  Andromaque,  H. 

"D.  I.  160,  Achille   (2),  G. 

"D.  XI.   104-S,  Nauzicaa. 


92  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

charged  with  an  important  message  for  Achilles,  should,  when 
he  delivers  that  message,  amuse  himself  with  nurse's  tales  and 
stories  of  adventure.-^  Virgil  is  also  open  to  censure  in  this 
matter  of  naivete.  It  is  certain  that  a  countess  or  marchioness 
would  think  it  bourgeois  to  express  such  a  sentiment  as  Dido's 
apropos  of  Aeneas : 

Si  quis  mihi  parvulus  aula 
Luderet  Aeneas.     .     .     ." 

The  modern  poetry  is  much  more  free  from  obscenities  than 
the  ancient.  Catullus  and  Horace  express  themselves  with  a 
license  found  at  present  only  in  such  poets  as  Theophile,  Sigogne, 
Motin,  and  Berthelot,  poets 

qui  font  I'horreur  des  honnetes  gens,  et  qui  ne  plaisent  qu'a  des  Soldats 
ou  a  des  Laquais.^^ 

It  may  be  that  the  seventeenth  century  is  not  actually  m.ore  virtu- 
ous than  any  other,  but  it  is  certain  that  there  is  more  regard 
for  outw^ard  decency.  The  writings  of  some  of  the  classic  poets 
indicate  that  the  ancient  times,  now  so  revered,  were  really  rough 
and  gross,  without  any  suggestion  of  true  urbanity.-^ 

In  one  case  the  ancient  poets  had  particular  merit :  they  ex- 
celled in  depicting  passion.  Their  theory  that  love  is  an  all- 
powerful  divinity  is  most  acceptable,  and  seems  to  be  the  result 
of  a  careful  study  of  the  great  book  of  nature.  Bayle  calls 
attention  to  the  attitude  of  Lucretius,  who  denied  the  providence 
of  the  gods  but  accepted  love  as  the  soul  of  the  universe.-*  In 
another  instance,  however,  Bayle  says  that  the  moderns  are 
undoubtedly  superior  to  the  ancients.  No  Greek  or  Roman 
writer  has  produced  anything  which  may  be  compared  with 
the  Contcs  of  La  Fontaine.  Certainly  the  joy  of  the  humanists 
would  be  great  if  they  should  find  an  ancient  author  who  had 
written  anything  with  the  grace  and  beauty  and  piquancy  that 
characterize  La  Fontaine's  work.-^ 


"D.  I.  158,  Achille  (2),  C. 

"D.   II.  99,   Andromaque,   H. 

^  O.  D.  I.  69.  Even  modern  comedy  and  modern  fiction,  says  Bayle 
here,  are  freed  to  some  extent  from  the  obscenity  that  once  characterized 
such  writings.  Cf.  D.  IV.  loi,  Brachmanes,  K;  D.  IV.  593.  Catulle; 
D.  IX.  233,  Lycurgue.   II;   O.  D.  I.  504.  i. 

"O.  D.  I.  634. 

*»0.   D.   I.  273.  V. 


Ancients  and  Moderns  93 

Bayle  offers  some  slight  cominent  concerning  various  other 
literary  genres.  In  regard  to  the  drama  he  suggests  that  the 
modern  public  would  not  tolerate  a  frankness  in  calling  things 
by  their  names  which  did  not  shock  the  delicacy  of  Greek  and 
Roman  ears.""  In  one  case  he  compares  two  plays,  the  Amphi- 
tryon of  I'lautus  and  the  Amphitryon  of  Aloliere.  The  former 
is  excellent,  but  if  the  outcome  of  the  dispute  over  ancients  and 
moderns  depended  on  these  two  productions  the  modems  would 
win.  Molicre  had  to  make  many  changes  to  adapt  the  piece 
to  the  French  stage ;  his  raillery  and  finesse  are  much  superior 
to  that  of  Plautus.-''  As  to  memoirs,  there  are  few  supporters 
of  antiquity  so  prejudiced  as  to  declare  Julius  Caesar  the  superior 
of  La  Rochefoucauld.-'*  In  the  matter  of  panegyrics,  too,  Bayle 
claims  the  victory  for  his  contemporaries — or  at  least  he  claims 
that  the  moderns  go  to  even  greater  extremes  than  the  ancients 
in  this  regard.  The  ancients,  indeed,  hardly  recognized  any 
limit : 

II  n'y  a  presque  point  de  louange  qu'on  ne  trouve  dans  les  anciens 
paneg>Tistes.  Peu  s'en  faut  que  Pline  n'ait  epuise  toutes  les  idees  de 
la  perfection  d'un  souverain."* 

But  the  moderns  have  gone  even  further: 

les  panegj'fistes  modernes  poussent  leurs  idees  plus  loin  que  ne  faisaient 
les  anciens,   quoique  ceux-ci   eussent  une   plus   ample  matiere.^ 

The  most  ardent  partisans  of  the  ancients,  says  Bayle,  must 
admit  that  in  this  kind  of  literature  their  heroes  are  surpassed.^^ 
In  history  also  the  moderns  are  superior.  The  ancient  historians 
are  inaccurate,  they  neglect  details,  they  do  not  note  carefully 
the  events  which  took  place  under  their  very  eyes.  The  moderns, 
given  the  same  opportunities  to  control  the  material,  could  pro- 
duce much  better  histories.^- 


"•D.  XIV.  59,  Tecmesse,  B. 

"  D.   I.   552,   Amphitryon,   B. 

^D.  V.  30,  Cesar,  G. 

"D.  VI.  254-5,  Ermite,  G. 

^-D.  VI.  51,  Drusus  (3),  D.    Cf.  O.  D.  I.  350;  O.  D.  IV.  535. 

'^D.  VI.  51.  Drusus  (3),  C. 

"^D.  II.  49,  Anaxagoras.  K;  D.  II.  574,  Aurelien.  I;  D.  IV.  421,  Cap- 
padoce,  J;  D.  IV.  425,  Cappadoce,  K;  D.  IV.  504,  Cassius  (4),  F;  D.  V. 
288.  Conon  (2),  I;  D.  VI.  382,  Fabricius,  E;  D.  VIII.  159,  Hirpius,  B; 
O.  D.  I.  617,  iii;  O.  D.  I.  633. 


94  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

Bayle  does  not  bring  up  definitely  the  question  as  to  whether 
there  is  any  broad  underlying  principle  which  should  determine 
a  preference  for  the  one  school  or  the  other.  But  he  at  least 
suggests,  apropos  of  the  epic,  the  idea  that  the  real  issue  is 
the  question  of  progress ;  that  it  is  not  a  matter  of  comparing 
the  relative  merits  of  an  ancient  and  a  modern  individual,  but 
of  deciding  whether  the  seventeenth  century  is  a  step  nearer  per- 
fection than  the  preceding  ones.  If  the  epics  of  antiquity  are 
imperfect  it  is  the  fault  of  their  time.^^  The  license  of  the 
ancient  poets  is  not  to  be  blamed  so  much  on  the  individuals  as 
on  the  period  in  which  they  lived. ^*  In  a  word,  our  author 
seems  to  think  that  since  the  time  of  the  ancients  there  has  been 
progress. 


Bayle  also  says  that  the  inaccuracy  of  the  ancients  may  be  noted  in 
their  works  of  erudition  and  that  their  scientific  skill  is  slight.  D.  I. 
418,  Aldrovandus;  D.  II.  257,  Archelaus  (2),  A;  D.  III.  431,  Byblos, 
C;  D.  VI.  267,  Eschyle,  H;  D.  XL  102,  Naucratis,  B;  O.  D.  I.  136, 
xiii;   O.   D.  IV.  731. 

'''D.  II.  99,  Andromaque,  H;  cf.  D  I.  160,  Achille  (2),  G;  D.  XI.  105-6, 
Nauzicaa,  C;  O.  D.  IV.  534. 

"'O.  D.  I.  69. 


THE  FUNCTION  OF  THE  CRITIC 

The  criticism  of  books  is  undoubtedly  valuable,  in  Bayle's 
opinion.  He  does  not  take  up  the  question  directly,  he  does 
not  discuss  formally  the  functions  of  the  critic  or  the  services 
he  may  render  to  the  world  of  letters ;  but  his  general  attitude 
indicates  clearly  that  he  believes  the  role  of  the  literary  judge 
to  be  significant.  Whether  he  tlrinks  that  criticism  improves 
public  taste  or  plays  any  part  in  shaping  this  taste  Bayle  does 
not  say — indeed  he  probably  had  no  ideas  on  the  subject,  for 
in  any  case  criticism  could  not  mean  to  him  what  it  has  meant 
to  the  nineteenth  century.  But  of  the  fact  that  it  is  useful  to 
the  author  himself  Bayle  has  no  doubt.  To  be  sure  there  are 
drawbacks.  The  author  is  apt  to  suffer  when  his  work  is  brought 
before  the  tribunal.  Since  no  book  is  perfect  a  fair  judgment 
is  certain  to  hurt  ;^  it  is  always  possible  to  find  details  open  to 
censure.  And,  though  it  may  be  maintained  that  when  a  book 
is  criticised  it  is  brought  before  the  public  and  given  especial 
prominence,  this  is  a  doubtful  advantage,  as  is  seen  in  the  case 
of  the  Cid.  Certainly  M.  Corneille  had  no  reason  to  be  thankful 
for  the  remarks  of  Scudery  and  the  Academy,  which  indeed 
brought  his  famcusc  tragicomcdie  to  the  attention  of  the  whole 
reading  public,  but  which  revealed  to  this  public  serious  faults.^ 
Yet  even  if  criticism  lays  bare  imperfections  and  so  disturbs  the 
peace  of  an  author,  it  brings  mistakes  to  his  attention  and  enables 
him  to  correct  blemishes  which  would  otherwise  have  continued 
to  disfigure  his  work.^    This  is  surely  worth  while. 


^O.  D.  IV.  530. 

"  O.  D.  IV.  530.  Cf .  "  En  effet  il  est  certain  que  comme  la  reputation 
d'une  Femme  vertueuse  ne  se  releve  jamais  si  parfaitement  des  blessures 
de  la  calomnie,  qu'elle  n'en  porte  toujours  la  cicatrice;  un  savant  homme 
qui  essuye  la  censure  d'un  ennemi  redoutable,  ne  tire  jamais  si  bien  son 
epingle  du  jeu.  qu'il  n'y  laisse  quelque  chose." 

'O.  D.  I.  601,  viii. 


96  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

The  characteristics  of  Bayle  himself  as  a  reader  and  judge  of 
books  are  shown  by  various  remarks  in  his  writings.  These 
remarks  are  valuable,  not  only  because  they  reveal  his  own  indi- 
vidual traits,  but  also  because  they  throw  light  on  his  opinions 
concerning  the  general  attitude  to  be  taken  by  a  critic.  It  is 
desirable  in  the  first  place  to  note  these,  and  then  to  proceed 
to  the  more  impersonal  comments  which  give  further  indication 
of  his  doctrine  of  criticism. 

The  universal  curiosity  of  our  author,  the  interest  he  takes  in 
all  kinds  of  books,  is  shown  by  his  own  observations  as  to  the 
character  of  his  reading.  He  is  omniverous.  He  shifts  from 
works  of  erudition  to  the  latest  novel — each  book  interests  him 
in  turn  and  holds  for  the  moment  all  of  his  attention.  In  a 
letter  written  in  1671  he  testifies  to  the  diversity  of  subjects 
which  he  covers  in  his  reading.* 

Vous  saurez  .  .  .  que  comme  je  ne  suis  pas  capable  d'une  forte 
application,  ce  qui  fait  que  le  dernier  Livre  que  je  vois,  est  celui  que 
je  prefere  a  tons  les  autres,  il  est  arrive  que  j'ai  fait  une  lecture  assez 
vague  et  assez  diversifiee,  et  que  j'ai  bien  souvent  change  de  tablature 
en  peu  de  terns,  car  tantot  je  me  suis  adonne  aux  langues,  tantot  a  la 
Philosophie,  ensuite  a  I'histoire,  aux  antiquitez,  a  la  geographic,  et  aux 
livres  galans,  selon  que  ces  diverses  matieres  m'etoient  offertes,  et  tout 
cela  sans  faire  qu'efleurer  les  choses,  arrivant  que  je  suis  toujours 
degoute  d'un  sujet  avant  que  d'avoir  eu  le  terns  de  le  connoitre.  soit 
qu'il  ne  me  plaise  plus  du  tout,  soit  qu'il  me  plaise  moins  que  quelqu'autre 
dont  la  curiosite  me  prend.  D'ou  que  cela  precede,  il  est  certain  que 
jamais  amant  volage  n'a  plus  souvent  change  de  maitresse,  que  moi  de 
livres.'"* 

He  goes  on  to  speak  of  some  of  the  books  he  has  read.  He 
names  first  a  Greek  Grammar  by  the  older  Vossius,  next  Homer, 
Hesiod  and  Theocritus,  then  the  Latins,  Juvenal,  Ovid  and 
Cicero,  and  finally  a  variety  of  modern  authors.  The  moderns, 
he  says,  seem  to  have  attracted  him  more  than  the  ancients.  The 
list  of  modern  writers  given  here  includes  such  men  as  Saumaise, 
Morus,  Milton,  Spanheim,  Scaliger  and  le  Fevre.  He  mentions 
also  Mile,  des  Jardins  and  Mile,  de  Scudery.  This  same  universal 
interest  of  Rayle  is  reflected  in  a  remark  to  his  younger  brother." 
When  he  writes  to  his  brother  concerning  some  book  it  does  not 


*0.  D.  I.  L.  13. 
°  O.  D.  I.  L.  13. 
•O.  D.  I.  L.  37. 


The  Function  of  the  Critic  97 

mean  that  he  recommends  it,  says  Bayle ;  simply  it  is  a  new 
book,  or  he  has  read  it  or  heard  of  it— therefore  it  seems  worth 
mentioning.  I>ayle  suggests  that  he  is  as  superficial  in  this  read- 
ing as  he  is  catholic,  that  he  looks  into  many  books  but  that  he 
does  not  give  them  profound  thought  and  that  they  do  not  make 
a  lasting  impression  on  him.^  Doubtless  he  glided  lightly  over 
many  subjects,  but  in  view  of  his  own  productions  and  his  written 
comments  on  books,  this  statement  is  to  be  accepted  with  reserve. 
It  certainly  cannot  be  said  that  Bayle  did  not  think  a1)out  what 
he  read. 

The  editor  of  the  i\ouvcllcs  states  that  he  is  inclined  to  be 
very  lenient  when  he  judges  a  book.  He  looks  on  authors  with 
particular  favor,  on  account  of  the  way  they  devote  their  efforts 
to  the  public  good,  and  consequently  he  is  always  more  ready 
to  praise  than  to  blame. 

On  se  sent  un  grand  penchant  a  loiier  les  Livres  dont  on  parle,  et  c'est 
la  moindre  reconnoissance  que  Ton  puisse  avoir  pour  un  Auteur  qui 
nous  instruit,  et  qui  a  quelquefois  travaille  plusieurs  annees  de  suite 
avec  des  fatigues  accablantes,  a  nous  faire  son  present.* 

This  same  readiness  to  criticise  favorably  is  reflected  in  his 
remarks  about  the  pernicious  maxim  that  a  book  to  be  esteemed 
must  be  without  fault.''     Furthermore  he  objects  to  the  severity 


'Cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  13;  O.  D.  I.  L.  107. 

'■  O.  D.  I.  102  Avertissement.  Cf .  O.  D.  II.  287 :  Bayle  refers  to  his 
tendency  to  say  that  a  book  is  good  rather  than  bad.  as  a  weakness 
which  shows  lack  of  penetration;  cf.  O.  D.  II.  236:  "j'avoue  que  j'ai 
plus  de  penchant  a  trouver  qu'un  Livre  est  bon,  qu'a  trouver  qu'il  est 
mauvais ;"  cf.  O.  D.  IV.  750-1,  xix :  "  II  n'y  a  gueres  de  Livre  qui  ne 
me  paroisse  bon,  quand  je  ne  le  lis  que  pour  le  lire.  II  faut  que  pour 
en  trouver  le  foible,  je  m'attache  de  propos  delibere  a  le  chercher." 
The  criticism  which  is  written  with  a  careful  regard  for  proofs,  with 
careful  thought  and  meditation,  is  of  course  more  valuable,  says  Bayle, 
than  the  criticism  which  consists  of  general  praise. 

'O.  D.  IV.  178.  viii;  cf.  O.  D.  IV.  580-1,  xxxvii :  "II  est  bien  vrai, 
que  comme  il  y  a  des  femmes,  qui  a  les  prendre  en  gros.  sont  mal  faites, 
bien  qu'elles  ayent  de  tres  belles  parties,  il  peut  y  avoir  des  Harangues 
et  des  Livres  dignes  de  consideration  si  on  les  examine  piece  a  piece, 
mais  dont  le  corps  entier  soit  defectueux ;"  cf .  D.  XII.  94,  Pinet,  D : 
"  Pour  peu  qu'on  soit  equitable,  et  que  Ton  connaisse  la  difficulte  de 
I'entreprise,  on  sera  incomparablement  plus  dispose  a  estimer  cet  auteur 
a  cause  de  tant  d'endroits  ou  il  a  bien  rencontre  qu'a  le  mepriser  a 
cause  de  ses  bevues."     Of  a  translation  of  Pliny. 


I 


98  Tlie  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

of  critics  who  have  never  themselves  tried  their  hand  at  author- 
ship.^*^ They  are  apt  to  be  much  more  exacting  than  critics  who 
have  been  authors  and  who  have  experienced  the  difficulties  of 
the  metier;  the  latter  judge  with  less  rigor  and  more  fairness. 
And  there  are  cases  where  harsh  criticism  is  particularly  uncalled 
for;  in  some  instances  critics  may  be  much  less  able  to  judge 
of  the  merits  of  a  book  than  the  author  himself,  although  his 
general  power  of  discrimination  be  inferior  to  theirs. ^^  It  is 
possible  that  he  has  worked  on  a  particular  subject  until  he 
has  an  unusual  amount  of  information  as  to  how  that  subject 
should  be  treated,  and  in  such  a  case  his  judgment  is  better  than 
that  of  the  ordinary  critic.  Evidently  Bayle  is  ready  to  show 
a  liberal  amount  of  consideration  for  authors. 

The  fairness  of  spirit  recommended  to  a  critic  is  seen 
in  the  various  editorials,  if  they  may  so  be  called, 
which  are  inserted  in  the  Nouvelles.  In  these  Ains  an 
Lecteur  our  author  outlines  the  policy  which  he  wishes  to 
follow  in  the  conduct  of  the  journal.  He  may  see  fit,  from 
time  to  time,  to  give  a  definite  judgment  of  a  book,  but 
certainly  any  remarks  which  are  introduced  will  be  free  from 
malice,  and  will  be  couched  in  such  terms  as  not  to  irritate 
the  author  in  question.  He  does  not,  by  any  means,  set  himself 
up  as  a  final  judge;  whosoever  sees  fit  may  appeal  from  his 
decisions.  Indeed  tastes  so  vary  that  a  man  should  show  neither 
astonishment  nor  chagrin  when  others  fail  to  agree  with  him. 
Any  remarks  which  Bayle  makes  are  subject  to  the  corrections 
of  the  readers.  If  a  reader  convinces  him  of  a  mistake  in  a 
fact  or  an  opinion  he  will  be  grateful  and  will  publish  the 
matter  in  the  Nouvelles,  provided,  of  course,  that  the  censure 
is  not  vindictive  and  personal.  He  is  not  one  who  believes  that 
the  dignity  of  an  author  suffers  when  he  shows  a  willingness  to 
submit  his  work  to  the  public  and  to  be  corrected  by  the  public. 


"•D.  Vri.  470,  Ilaillan.  I;  D.  XV.  246,  Dissert,  cont.  le  Projct,  C. 

Cf .  O.  D.  I.  29s,  iii :  It  is  easier  to  criticise  another  man's  book  than 
to  write  a  book  oneself  which  shall  be  as  good. 

"  D.  VII.  471,  Haillan,  I.  Bayle  adds  a  personal  note;  he  says  he 
knows  belter  liow  the  Dictionar\  slumld  be  written  tiian  some  of  his 
critics. 


The  Function  of  the  Critic  99 

In  short,  if  Bayle  sees  fit  to  criticise  a  book,  he  will  be  fair  and 
moderate,  and  not  claim  that  he  is  tout  Ic  mondc.^'- 

This  same  insistence  upon  fairness,  and  upon  the  exactness 
necessary  in  an  equitable  judge,  is  further  indicated  in  remarks 
outside  of  the  N ouvcUcs?'^  Bayle  states  that  when  a  man  sets 
out  to  judge  a  book  he  should  take  into  consideration  the  age 
and  position  of  the  writer,  tiic  nature  of  the  subject  which  he 
is  treating,  and  the  kind  of  i)ublic  he  is  api)ealing  to  in  his 
production. ^^  Bayle  dwells  particularly  on  this  need  of  consider- 
ing the  purpose  of  the  author.  He  speaks  of  this  apropos  of 
Fontenelle's  Hisfoirc  dcs  Oracles^''  The  public  is  apt  to  censure 
a  book  which  is  full  of  erudition  but  which  is  dry  and  unattrac- 
tive ;  the  public  is  equally  ready  to  find  fault  with  a  work  more 
distinguished  for  polish  than  for  learning.  In  either  case  the 
public  is  very  likely  wrong.     For,  above  all,  the  end  which  the 


"Cf.  O.  D.  I.  2,  loi,  196,  504.  Cf.  also  O.  D.  IV.  614,  Ixiii ;  620; 
621,  Ixxi. 

Cf.  also  D.  XVI.  lo-li,  Pref.  de  la  Premiere  Ed,  iv :  Bayle  says  that 
he  ventures  to  correct  authors  in  the  same  spirit  that  a  humble  soldier 
might  criticise  his  general — all  the  while  recognizing  his  own  inferiority. 

Cf  also  D.  XV.  10,  Zabarella,  G:  Bayle  explains  that  he  has  changed 
opinion  concerning  a  book  which  he  first  knew  only  through  others, 
and  which  he  has  since  read  himself.  He  does  not  suppress  his  earlier 
opinion,  already  published,  but  admits  frankly  that  he  was  wrong. 

Cf.  also  O.  D.  I.  440:  It  is  suggested  that  a  man  of  good  sense  would 
not  try  to  give  a  final  judgment  of  the  worth  of  an  author.  "  Ce  seroit 
trop  se  commettre,  et  usurper  un  Empire  dont  on  secoiieroit  le  joug 
incessamment  et  qui  ne  reiissiroit  pas  meme  dans  Rome  a  un  Concile 
de   Trente." 

Bayle  holds  that  authors  should  accept  his  criticisms  in  the  spirit 
which  prompts  them.  He  judges  his  own  friends,  he  says,  with  par- 
ticular freedom,  and  believes  they  will  understand  his  motives.  Indeed 
it  is  a  slur  on  an  author  to  hesitate  in  criticising  him ;  it  implies  that 
he  is  not  broad  enough  to  accept  corrections  in  the  right  way.  D.  VI. 
603.  Fronton,  C;  D.  XV.  234-5.  Dissert,  cont.  le  Pro  jet,  vi ;  O.  D.  I. 
508,  iii. 

Cf.  also  O.  D.  II.  165 :  Bayle  testifies  to  his  own  willingness  to  be 
corrected  (apropos  of  the  Critique  Generale  de  I'Histoire  du  Calvinisme) ; 
cf.  O.  D.   IV.  621,  Ixx. 

^'  Cf .  D.  XII.  217,  Polonus,  B :  "  deux  qualities  essentielles  a  un  bon 
censeur,  I'equite  et  I'exactitude."    Apropos  of  religious  controversy. 

"  D.  III.  493.  Boccace,  I. 

"O.   D.   I.  750. 


I  oo  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

author  seeks  to  attain  must  be  considered,  and  it  may  be  that 
he  is  writing  for  men  of  science  who  would  be  content  only 
with  a  work  that  bristles  with  learning,  or  it  may  be  that  he 
is  catering  to  the  popular  taste  and  tries  to  choose  what  would 
be  interesting  and  diverting  for  the  ordinary  reader.^*^  IMany 
would-be  critics  of  books  need  to  have  this  distinction  brought 
before  them.  Exactness  demands  that  one  should  be  extremely 
careful  in  reporting  the  remarks  of  an  author.  A  critic  must 
set  up  for  himself  a  hard  and  fast  rule :  let  him  report  the 
statement  of  his  author  accurately,  adding  nothing  and  taking 
nothing  away.  He  must  not  draw  conclusions  from  an  author's 
statement  and  refer  to  them  as  the  author's  own,  unless  the 
latter  admits  them  as  such.^^ 

Criticism,  then,  is  to  be  carefully  restricted  by  the  demands  of 
impartiality  and  accuracy.  But  these  are  the  only  limitations 
upon  which  Bayle  insists ;  indeed  he  dwells  especially  on  the 
liberties  w-hich  a  critic  may  allow  himself  once  he  has  recognized 
these  requirements.  The  Republic  of  Letters  is  a  free  state ; 
its  citizens  are  on  equal  terms  and  there  is  no  such  thing  as 
special  favor.  The  law  has  no  authority  in  this  dominion.  It 
is  deplorable  for  a  man,  engaged  in  criticizing  another  in  the 
Republic  of  Letters,  to  call  upon  the  law  to  defend  him  against 
his  adversary,  to  appeal  to  the  authority  of  the  magistrates  to 
suppress  the  other  man's  books.  Such  an  action  betrays  the 
weakness  of  his  own  position,  lays  him  open  to  ridicule  and 
increases  interest  in  the  writings  of  his  opponent.  He  may 
derive  a  certain  satisfaction  from  showing  the  world  at  large 
his  influence  in  the  courts,  and  he  may  convince  some  ignorant 


'"  Bayle  adds :  "  C'est  un  merite  bien  plus  releve  qu'on  ne  pense,  que 
composer  un  Ecrit  dont  les  materiaux  valent  moins  que  la  fagon.  .'' 

O.  D.  I.  750. 

"  D.  III.  122,  Barlette,  B ;  cf .  D.  V.  6,  Cerinthus,  B  :  "  quel  droit  a-t-on 
d'imputer  a  un  auteur  un  detail  qu'il  n'expose  pas?";  cf.  O.  D.  IV.  175: 
a  reference  to  "  le  soin  de  n'imputer  pas  aux  Auteurs  que  Ton  critique 
ce  qu'ils  n'ont  point  dit ;"  cf.  also  O.  D.  I.  449-50 :  "  Car  lors  qu'il  s'agit 
de  rendre  compte  d'un  Livre,  j'y  aporte  toute  I'attention  dont  je  suis 
capable  .  .  .  ;"  cf.  also  D.  III.  331,  Berenger :  "  quand  on  appuie 
trop  rigidement  sur  certaines  expressions,  sans  se  revetir  de  cet  esprit 
d'equite  qui  cherche  le  sens  d'un  auteur  dans  le  but  et  dans  les  principes 
de  scs  ouvraRcs,  on  trouve  aiseinent  des  propositions  erronees."  Of  an 
accusation  that  Saint  Bernard  was  heterodox. 


The  Function  of  the  Critic  ini 

people  that,  since  the  other  man's  books  are  so  condemned,  they 
contain  falsehoods ;  but  he  is  wrong  to  introduce  law  into  a 
matter  with  which  law  has  nothing  to  do.^**  The  only  tribunals 
recognized  in  the  Republic  of  Letters  are  those  presided  over 
by  Truth  and  Reason.  Before  these  each  citizen  of  the  state 
is  on  absolutely  the  same  basis  as  his  fellows,  and  before  these 
lie  has  the  right  and  duty,  when  occasion  arises,  to  criticise  his 
best  friends  and  the  members  of  his  own  family.  It  is  just  that 
one  citizen  of  the  Republic  should  refute  another  who  has,  he 
thinks,  made  a  mistake;  the  credit  of  the  second  man  may,  indeed, 
be  impaired,  but  his  critic  has  to  take  the  same  chance,  and  it 
is  all  in  the  interest  of  truth. ^'•' 

With  the  principle  established  that  there  shall  be  absolute 
freedom  of  speech  in  the  Republic  of  Letters  within  the  bounds 
of  justice,  the  question  remains  as  to  what  standards  shall  be 
set  up  for  judging  a  literary  work.  Is  there  an  absolute  code 
of  tastes  according  to  which  each  case  may  be  decided?  Nat- 
urally enough,  Bayle  does  not  give  the  matter  any  formal  treat- 
ment. But  various  remarks  give  some  indication  of  his  ideas 
on  the  subject.  He  does  have  something  to  say  on  standards  of 
taste,  and  there  are  some  suggestions  as  to  the  possibility  of 
variance  in  these  standards  according  to  time  and  environment. 

Taste  is  really  an  individual  matter,  and  each  individual  has 
a  standard  of  his  own,  based  upon  his  own  particular  make-up. 


'''  D.  XIV.  134-7,  140-1.  Thomas,  D.  E.  I.  Apropos  of  the  quarrel  of 
Girac  and  Costar.  Cf.  D.  XIV.  49,  Tavernier,  E:  The  public  is  the 
natural  tribunal  for  judging  a  dispute  among  men  of  letters,  but  a 
controversial  writer  may  indeed  appeal  to  the  courts  when  his  personal 
honor  is  attacked  in  an  insulting  libel. 

'"  D.  IV.  584,  Catius,  D.  Bayle  speaks  especially  of  savants.  He  also 
brings  up  the  question  of  libels  in  the  Republic  of  Letters  and  attacks 
the  practice  with  some  vigor;  cf.  O.  D.  IV.  529,  iv :  A  ref.  to  "  le 
genie  republicain  et  independant  du  bel  Esprit;"  cf.  O.  D.  II.  203,  vii : 
Bayle  characterises  the  Republic  of  Letters  and  speaks  once  more  of  the 
need  of  avoiding  malice.  He  says :  "  II  importe  au  bien  general  de  la 
Republique  des  Lettres,  la  plus  libre,  et  la  plus  independante  de  toutes 
les  Societes,  que  personne  n'entreprenne  impunement  sur  la  liberte  des 
autres,  et  que  Ton  fasse  sentir  avec  usure  a  ceux  qui  foulent  aux  pieds 
les  regies  de  I'honnetete,  ce  qu'ils  ont  fait  sentir  a  leurs  Confreres;" 
cf.  O.  D.  I.  444,  Avcrtiss:  Readers  and  authors  in  the  Republic  of 
Letters  have  the  right  to  criticise  each  other  freely. 


ia2  The.  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

One  of  Bayle's  comments  on  the  variety  of  ways  in  which  differ- 
ent people  will  judge  the  same  thing  is  especially  interesting. 

Plusieurs  personnes  regardent  un  meme  tableau,  Chef-d'oeuvre  d'un 
Michel  Ange,  et  en  font  mille  jugemens  differens.  Celui  qui  est  dans 
le  point  de  vue,  et  qui  est  connoisseur  le  trouve  admirable;  d'autres  qui 
le  regardent  d'un  autre  point,  et  qui  n'ont  nul  goiit,  ni  habilite,  le 
meprisent.  Le  connoisseur  pourra  se  moquer  tant  qu'il  lui  plaira  de 
leur  ignorance,  ou  en  avoir  pitie ;  mais  il  seroit  ridicule  s'il  les  accusoit 
de  mentir,  et  de  soutenir  malicieusement  que  le  Tableau  ne  vaut  rien, 
pendant  qu'ils  savent  le  contraire.  Oh !  mais  la  beaute  de  ce  Tableau 
est  si  visible  qu'il  n'y  a  pas  moyen  de  ne  la  voir  pas !  Qui  vous  a  dit 
cela,  et  vous-meme  qui  la  connoissez  si  bien,  voyez-vous  la  bonte  et 
la  beaute  de  certaines  pierreries  qu'un  Joiiaillier  pretend  qui  doit  sauter 
aux  yeux  de  tout  le  monde?  Vous  trouvez  peut-etre  le  vin  de  Canarie 
si  bon,  que  vous  croyez  qu'il  ne  faut  qu'avoir  une  langue  pour  sentir 
cette  bonte ;  mais  combien  y  a-t-il  de  gens  qui  valent  autant  que  vous, 
et  qui  ne  boivent  que  de  I'eau,  qui  ne  sauroient  mettre  dans  leur 
bouche  le  vin  sans  le  trouver  tres-mauvais.  Ainsi  c'est  une  ignorance 
crasse  du  monde,  et  de  I'homme  principalement,  que  de  juger  du  gout 
d'autrui   par    le   notre."" 

Beyond  this  fact  of  the  variability  of  taste  Bayle  has  only  one 
general  principle  to  lay  down  on  the  subject;  but  on  this  one 
he  insists  with  considerable  definiteness.  The  judgment  of  con- 
noisseurs is  infinitely  superior  to  that  of  the  general  public ;  the 
testimony  of  the  minority  is,  in  many  cases,  much  more  weighty 
than  that  of  the  majority. ^^  It  is  true,  of  course,  that  a  work 
of  art  which  is  approved  both  by  the  people  and  by  the  critics 
of  the  metier  may  be  reckoned  better  than  one  which  wins  the 
votes  of  the  latter  only.  There  are  certain  branches  of  art,  such 
as  painting,  music  and  oratory,  which,  appealing  to  the  senses, 
often  have  a  distinct  attraction  for  both  classes.  But  when  it 
comes  to  a  choice  between  the  approbation  of  the  one  class  or 
of  the  other,  as  often  happens  in  the  case  of  qualites  de  I'esprit, 
there  is  no  doubt  as  to  which  is  the  more  desirable.  The  drama, 
to  be  sure,  is  meant,  above  all,  to  please  the  people,  and  therefore 
a  playwright  is  excusable  for  catering  to  their  taste,  but  certainly 
the  praise  of  those  few  who  are  well  acquainted  with  the  details 
of  composing  a  piece  is  much  surer  proof  of  excellence  than  the 


*"  O.   D.   II.   396.     It  must  be  noted  that  this   is  part  of   an   argument 
which  Bayle  uses  in  a  religious  controversy. 
^'O.   D.   III.  200-204. 


The  Functioti  of  the  Critic  103 

commendation  accorded  by  the  general  public.  Oratory  offers 
another  example.  If  those  who  give  public  addresses  had  to 
choose  between  pleasing  the  crowd  and  pleasing  a  select  few, 
the  common  weal  would  probably  demand  that  they  choose  the 
first  alternative.  But,  in  any  case,  a  speech  or  sermon  which 
receives  the  vote  of  the  connoisseurs  is  certainly  superior  to  one 
approved  only  by  the  vulgar  herd. 

Just  as  Bayle  insists  on  the  value  of  the  opinions  given  by 
the  elect,  so  he  decries  the  importance  of  popular  judgments. 
Often  enough  the  reading  public  does  not  understand  the  art  of 
reading,"  and  the  mistakes  and  indeed  tiie  unfairness  of  this 
public  are  manifest  in  a  variety  of  ways.-""  They  are  careless  ;^* 
they  skip  the  passages  which  they  do  not  understand  at  first 
glance,  and  label  them  obscure;*^  they  jump  at  conclusions.^* 
Bayle  declaims  with  particular  vigor  against  this  precipitate  kind 
of  judgment  in  the  case  of  certain  remarks  he  makes  on  an 
edition  of  La  Fontaine's  fables.  Because  he  praises  the  fables 
in  some  respects  the  readers  will  at  once  conclude,  he  says,  that 
La  Fontaine  is  incomparable  in  every  way.  That  is  the  habit 
of  readers :  if  they  see  an  author  praised  for  his  learning  they 
at  once  conclude  he  is  also  polished,  discerning  and  keen ;  if 
they  see  his  intelligence  commended  they  immediately  infer  that 
he  is  also  noteworthy  for  erudition.  Certainly  these  people  do 
not  know  how^  to  discriminate.^^  Moreover,  readers  are  vain,  and 
it  is  pleasing  to  their  self  esteem,  and  gives  them,  as  well,  a 
certain  malignant  satisfaction,  to  be  able  to  criticise  a  book.^® 


■*  Cf .  O.  D.  I.  562,  "I'art  de  lire,  qui  est  une  chose  peu  connue." 

"  Cf.  O.  D.  IV.  880,  cccxliii :  "On  ne  peut  rien  voir  de  plus  injuste 
que  la  plupart  des  Lecteurs."  Bayle  speaks  apropos  of  his  own  con- 
troversial writings. 

=*Cf.   O.  D.  I.  290,  ix. 

="D.  II.  264.  Archelaus    (3).  F. 

»  Cf .  O.  D.  I.  264,  iv ;  O.  D.  I.  529.  ii. 

''O.  D.  I.  274,  V. 

^O.  D.  II.  161.  The  references  to  this  Avis  (O.  D.  II.  161-3)  are  to 
comments  Bayle  makes  apropos  of  the  publication  of  the  NoHvelles  Lct- 
tres  sur  FHist.  du   Calvinisme.     He  is  arguing  that  a  writer's 

second  book  is  not  apt  to  receive  as  warm  a  welcome  as  his  first  and 
he  makes  these  statements  in  support  of  that. 

Cf :  "  Se  porter  simplement  pour  Juge  de  la  bonte  d'un  Ouvrage,  c'est 
quelque  chose.     Mais  juger  qu'un  Livre  est  meilleur  qu'un   autre,  c'est 


I04  TJie  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

They  are  easily  dazzled  with  what  is  brilliant,  and  they  do  not 
attach  the  right  significance  to  solid  values.  They  are  inclined 
to  judge  a  book  like  a  painting. 

Ceux  qui  ne  savent  pas  a  fond  les  finesses  de  la  peinture,  jugent 
toujours  de  la  beaute  d'un  Tableau  par  la  vivacite  du  coloris :  ils  ne 
sont  presque  sensibles  qu'aux  enlumineures :  les  manieres  les  plus  finies 
qui  ont  toujours  quelque  chose  de  sec,  ne  les  touchent  pas.  II  en  va 
de  meme  de  la  plupart  des  Lecteurs.  Un  Livre  ou  Ton  ne  s'est  rien 
pardonne,  et  d'ou  Ton  a  banni  rigoureusement  tous  les  ornemens  superflus 
ne  leur  paroit  qu'un  squelette   desagreable.""^ 

The  taste  for  novelties,  characteristic  of  all  mankind,  makes 
readers  more  enthusiastic  about  the  first  production  of  an  author 
than  about  what  he  writes  after  they  have  become  well  ac- 
quainted with  his  work.^^  Here  is  another  manifestation  of  the 
uncertainty  of  the  judgment  of  the  reading  public:  on  account 
of  this  novelty-seeking  their  taste  may  be  depraved ;  they  may 
fail  to  appreciate  the  merits  of  a  book  by  a  well-known  author 
merely  because  it  lacks  the  charm  of  the  unfamiliar.  There  is 
perhaps  a  certain  malignity  in  this  case  too ;  a  reader  rather 
enjoys  finding  fault  with  an  author  whose  general  success  has 
become  a  little  wearisome. ^"^  Balzac  is  an  example  of  a  writer 
who  has  suffered  from  the  caprices  of  the  public ;  his  first  pro- 
ductions are  admired  far  more  than  the  later  ones,  although 
decidedly  inferior  to  them.^^     And  sometimes  an  author  is  re- 


bien  plus.  Le  discernement  du  bon  d'avec  le  meilleur  flate  tout  autre- 
ment  notre  vanite  que  le  discernment  du  bon  d'avec  le  mauvais.  Aussi 
on  se  sent  porte  par  I'amour  propre  a  juger,  que  de  deux  Ouvrages 
composez  par  un  habile  homme,  I'un  est  plus  parfait  que  I'autre."  More- 
over our  malignity  makes  us  take  pleasure  in  seeing  the  reputation  of 
an  author  lowered,  so  we  are  especially  ready  to  say  that  his  second 
production  is  not  as  good  as  his  first.     O.  D.   II.   i6i. 

"O.   D.    II.    162. 

*°  O.  D.  II.  162.  It  may  be,  adds  Bayle,  "  qu'en  toutes  choses  on  soit 
plus  dispose  a  faire  sa  cour  an  Soleil  levant  qu'au  Soleil  couchant." 
Cf.  above,  page  103,  note  28,  second  paragraph. 

On  the  ups  and  downs  of  authors  cf.  D.  VI.  265,  Eschyle,  G,  and 
O.  D.  III.  552:  "La  Republique  du  bel  esprit  est  comme  la  Cour  de' 
Roboam,  I'avis  des  jeunes  Conseillers  y  est  prefere  a  celui  des  vieux." 
Apropos  of  the  fall  of  Cotin. 

'^  O.  D.  II.  162.  Bayle  cites  Sorcl  as  his  authority  for  this;  cf.  D. 
III.  73,  Balzac  (2),  G. 


i 


The  Function  of  the  Critic  i  o  5 

jected  merely  because  his  name  does  not  happen  to  suit  the  ear.'* 
Truly  the  reading  public  is  made  up  of  strange  people.'*'' 

But  even  if  it  is  agreed  that  the  opinions  of  ordinary  readers 
are  of  slight  value,  and  that  the  standards  set  by  critics  of  experi- 
ence are  to  be  followed,  the  matter  of  judging  still  remains 
complicated.  The  best  connoisseurs  do  not  agree  among  them- 
selves.''*   The  same  fact  of  the  variability  of  tastes  and  standards 


"O.  D.  II.  162-3. 

"Cf.  O.  D.  I.  334.  Bayle  says,  apropos  of  religious  controversy:  "II 
f aut  avouer  que  la  plupart  des  Lecteurs  sont  d'etranges  gens ;  on  a  beau 
les  avertir  de  mille  choses;  on  a  beau  leur  recommander  ceci  ou  cela 
avec  de  tres-humbles  pneres;  ils  n'en  suivent  pas  moins  leur  humeur 
et  leur  coutume.  On  a  fait  des  Historiettes  sur  les  precautions  inutiles 
des  Meres  et  des  Maris.  Je  m'etonne  qu'on  n'en  fasse  sur  celles  de 
Messieurs  les  Auteurs." 

As  to  what  kind  of  readers  would  be  most  desirable  for  an  author, 
provided  he  could  choose,  Bayle  says  he  would  recommend  those  neither 
too  learned  nor  too  ignorant.  The  first  discern  faults  too  readily,  the 
others  have  not  enough  discrimination  to  pick  out  the  good  points. 
Bayle  agrees  with  Lucilius  on  this  score  and  cites  Cicero's  expression 
of  the  same  idea.  D.  IX.  486.  Lucilius.  F.  Cf .  however.  O.  D.  I.  505 : 
Bayle  approves  the  remark  of  Mile,  le  Fevre,  where  she  classifies  readers 
into  three  groups  according  to  whether  their  taste  is  good,  bad  or 
indififercnt,   and   where  she  indicates  her  preference   for  the  first   class. 

Although  he  makes  these  scornful  remarks  about  the  characteristics 
of  readers  in  general,  Bayle  indicates  clearly  that  in  his  own  writings 
he  believes  in  catering  to  their  various  tastes.  He  wishes  to  produce 
works  that  shall  please  all  classes  of  citizens  in  the  Republic  of  Letters 
— and  they  are  legion  (O.  D.  IV.  753,  xxx.) — by  the  diversity  and  inter- 
est of  the  material  presented.  He  does  not  himself  care  to  write  merely 
for  the  select  few  who  would  have  him  omit  such  points  of  erudition 
as  are  already  known  to  the  learned,  and  who  are  impatient  at  such 
digressions  as  serve  only  to  refresh  the  everyday  reader  after  troubling 
his  everyday  brain  with  abstract  problems  of  philosophy  and  theology. 
Various  comments  of  some  length  show  Bayle's  attitude.  For  remarks 
in  reference  to  the  Dictionary,  cf.  D.  VII.  112,  Gomarus,  B;  D.  XV. 
232.  Dissert,  cont.  le  Pro  jet;  D.  XV.  376,  Preface  de  M.  Bayle;  O.  D. 
IV.  753.  xxix.  Of  the  Noiivelles,  cf.  O.  D.  I.  101-2;  O.  D.  IV.  615.  Of 
Pensecs  diverses  a  I'Occasion  d'ttiic  Comcte,  cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  142,  xcvi.  Of 
Notivclles  Lettrcs  .  .  .  sur  I'Histoire  du  Calvinismc,  cf.  O.  D.  II.  164.  Of 
Repouse  aux  Questions  d'un  Provincial,  cf.  O.  D.  III.  501;  O.  D.  III.  897; 
O.  D.  IV.  840.  cccii.  On  the  difficulty  of  pleasing  the  public,  cf.  O.  D.  II. 
252,  xiii. 

**  Cf .  D.  XIV.  170,  Timee,  G:  "que  les  meilleurs  juges  des  ouvrages 
de    I'esprit    ne    s'accordaient    guere    mieux    anciennement    qu'aujourd'hui 


io6  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

is  manifest  in  the  case  of  the  elect.  In  any  instance,  the  fate 
which  a  book  meets  at  the  hands  of  the  pubhc  is  more  or  less 
a  matter  of  chance. ^^  All  rules  are  inadequate.  The  Cid  and 
Montaigne's  Essais  are  most  irregular,  but  have  met  with  unusual 
success.^"  There  is  only  one  principle  which  is  incontestable : 
de  gustibus  non  est  disputandnm}' 

Although  the  Rotterdam  sceptic  sees  so  little  that  suggests 
uniformity  in  any  aspect  of  the  question  of  taste,  he  is  inclined 
to  grant  that  the  standards  which  may  prevail  at  any  given 
time  have  enough  in  common  to  differentiate  them  from  the 
standards  which  characterize  other  periods.  He  is  ready  to 
admit  that  methods  of  literary  expression  and  the  principles  by 
which  these  methods  shall  be  judged  vary  as  units  from  age 
to  age. 

Of  the  world  in  general  he  agrees,  of  course,  that  there  is  a 
marked  difference  in  the  manners,  language,  point  of  view,  etc., 
of  the  successive  centuries. ^^     He  does  not  hold,  however,  to 

;"  cf .  D.  VIII.  403,  Jove,  F :  "  N'en  f aut-il  pas  conclure  que 
le  gout  des  plus  excellens  critiques  n'est  pas  uniforme  sur  une  matiere 
qui  ne  devrait  point  partager  les  jugemens?"  Apropos  of  the  style  of 
Paul  Jove. 

^  Cf.  Gigas.  39,  40;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  714,  vi.  "II  est  sur  que  le  caprice 
de  I'etoile  domine  autant  sur  les  Livres  et  sur  la  reputation  des  Ecrivains, 
que  sur  aucune  autre  chose,  et  que  c'est  un  ressort  plus  puissant  que 
les  eloges  ou  que  la  censure  de  tels  et  de  tels  .  .  .  ;"  cf.  D.  XV. 
212,  Dissert,  sur  le  Jour,  VI :  "  le  bonheur  qui  preside  sur  certains 
ecrits  .  .  .  ;"  cf.  also  O.  D.  III.  204:  "  Vous  n'ignorez  point  ce 
que  I'esprit  de  cabale,  le  caprice,  ou  le  changement  de  goiit,  la  com- 
plaisance interessee,  contribuent  quelquefois  a  faire  avoir  plus  de  vogue 
a  ceux  qui  n'excellent  pas  autant  que  d'autres  dans  les  beaux  arts ; " 
cf.  also  O.  D.  I.  79,  iii :  "  rien  ne  donne  tant  d'envie  d'avoir  un  Livre 
que  la  difficulte  de  le  trouver ;  et  c'est  bien  souvent  par  cette  difficulte 
que  des  Livres  qui  ne  valent  rien,  acquierent  une  grande  reputation." 
Apropos  of   a  religious   controversy. 

^  D.  XII.  28,  Philistus,  E.  Bayle  cites  La  Bruyere  in  a  passage  where 
the  latter  comments  on  the  diflference  between  a  bel  ouvrage  and  un 
ouvrage  parfait  ou  reguUer,  and  takes  the  Cid  as  an  example. 

"  Cf .  O.  D.  I.  L.  146,  xcviii :  "  on  ne  dispute  point  des  gouts ;  cf .  O. 
D.  I.  171;  "  Cela  nous  doit  montrer  que  la  beaute  n'est  qu'un  jeu  de 
notre  imagination,  qui  change  selon  les  pais  et  selon  les  siecles."  Apropos 
of  the  taste  of  the  ancients,  who  considered  a  petit  front  a  mark  of 
beauty. 

"  O.  D.  II.  256:  "Si  les  Frangois  du  cinquieme  siecle  revenoient  au 
monde,  il  ne  retrouveroient  pas  en  France  ni  leur  langue,  ni  lours  manirs, 


The  Function  of  the  Critic  107 

the  idea  that  these  changes  point  to  a  distinct  progress.  The 
moral  development  of  man  is  nil ;  his  history  is  a  history  of 
alternate  ups  and  downs  and,  at  the  end,  he  is  left  where  he 
started. 

Le  monde  est  un  veritable  jcii  de  bascule;  tour  a  tour  on  y  monte  et 
on  y  descend.  On  doit  admirer  dans  ce  jeu-la  les  profondeurs  dune 
sage  providence,  et  Tactivite  de  nos  passions.  .  .  .  D'ici  a  deux 
mille  ans,  si  le  monde  dure  autant,  les  reiterations  continuelles  de  la 
bascule  n'auront  rien  gagne  sur  le  cceur  humain."" 

In  his  attack  on  the  practice  of  bringing  the  secular  arm  of  the 
state  to  bear  against  those  accused  of  heretical  doctrine,  Bayle 
speaks  with  particular  definiteness  on  this. lack  of  progress.  The 
world  is  too  unsteady  to  profit  from  past  weaknesses.**'  And  in 
one  of  his  letters  Bayle  puts  the  shifting  in  morals  and  the  shift- 
ing in  matters  of  learning  into  the  same  classification. 

II  en  va  des  mocurs  comme  des  Sciences.  Celles-ci  ne  vent  pas  en 
augmentant.  Parvenues  a  un  haut  degre,  elles  font  place  peu  a  peu  a 
I'ignorance;  et,  a  leur  tour,  les  Siecles  barbares,  parvenus  au  comble, 
font  place  a  une  nouvelle  naissance  de  I'erudition.  C'est  ce  que  I'Histoire 
nous    apprend." 

On  various  occasions  Bayle  points  out  instances  of  the  changes 


ni  leurs  manieres  de  s'habiller,  de  batir,  d'apreter  les  viandes,  de  faire 
la  guerre,  de  terminer  leur  proces  etc.  Et  si  Ton  parcourt  toutes  les 
Nations  du  monde,  et  que  Ton  compare  les  loix,  les  moeurs,  la  Langue 
qu'elles  ont  en  un  certain  siecle,  avec  les  loix,  les  mceurs,  la  Langue  qu'elles 
avoient  dix  ou  douze  siecles  auparavant  on  y  trouve  des  differences 
enormes."  (part  of  an  argurncnt  de  circotistance)  \  cf.  D.  I.  242,  Agar; 
D.  IV.  104,  Brasavolus,  C;  D.  VI.  41,  Drusius,  B;  O.  D.  IV.  537. 

"D.  VI.  284-S.  Esope  (2),  I. 

*"  D.  I.  61,  Abelard,  O.  Bayle's  attitude  on  religious  tolerance  undoubt- 
edly makes  him  speak  with  the  more  vigor  here. 

"  O.  D.  IV.  731  ;  cf.  D.  I.  514,  Amyraut,  F:  "  Le  pis  est  qu'on  ne 
profite  pas  du  passe."  Of  a  certain  religious  doctrine;  O.  D.  I.  72;^'. 
"  c'est  la  destinee  de  I'homme  de  profiter  peu  du  terns  passe,  et  de 
laisser  revenir  les  memes  fautes,  aussi-bien  que  l^s  memes  modes ;  "  D.  V. 
278.  Conecte,  C :  "  Combien  les  modes  ont  leur  flux  et  leur  reflux ;"  O.  D.  I. 
708-9 :  '■  On  se  lasse  de  tout,  et  c'est  pour  cela  que  les  modes  les  plus 
courues  disparoissent  tot  ou  tard.  II  y  en  a  peu  qui  s'en  aillent  pour 
toujours;  elles  ressuscitent  presque  toutes  apres  un  certain  nombre  d'annes. 
Je  ne  sais  si  les  Recueils  des  Pieces  choisies  qui  ont  ete  autrefois  si  a  la 
mode,  et  qui  ont  tant  fait  gagner  les  Libraires,  se  releveront  un  jour  de 
leur  chute." 


io8  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

which  take  place  in  things  Hterary  from  age  to  age,  from  gen- 
eration to  generation,  even.  There  is  a  marked  difference  be- 
tween the  majestic  simpHcity  of  style  characteristic  of  Virgil, 
Cicero  and  the  writers  of  their  day  and  the  dazzling  but  inferior 
brilliancy  of  Pliny  the  Younger,  Seneca  and  Tacitus,  who  repre- 
sent a  later  period  in  Latin  literature.*-  The  difference  in  the 
age  is  noticeable  in  the  case  of  Lucretius.  His  eloquence  was 
so  excellent  that  if  he  had  lived  in  the  Augustan  age  he  might 
have  rivaled  Virgil.  But  thirty  or  forty  years  may  occasion  a 
vital  difference  between  two  authors.  The  poets  who  lived  at 
the  time  of  Henry  IV.  and  those  who  lived  during  the  minority 
of  Louis  XIV.  give  irrefutable  evidence  of  the  changes  which 
occur.*^ 

The  seventeenth  century  is  different  from  those  which  pre- 
ceded it.  Contrasted  with  the  sixteenth  it  may  be  said  to  be 
more  clever,  but  less  learned.  The  sixteenth  century  men  of 
letters  devoted  themselves  to  erudite  criticism,  and  gathered  a 
vast  number  of  facts ;  their  successors  have  a  different  taste 
and  have  been  distinguished  rather  by  the  fineness  of  their  dis- 
cernment, the  nicety  of  their  intelligence.**  Bayle  refers  a  num- 
ber of  times  to  the  enlightenment  of  his  own  age,  but  he  is 


*==D.  XII.  334,    Priolo,  L. 

*^0.  D.  I.  339,  iv;  cf.  D.  IX.  511,  Lucrece  (2),  B:  Bayle  suggests 
that  a  writer's  style  does  not  always  place  him  definitely  in  a  particular 
period.  "  Combien  avons-nous  d'auteurs  plus  jeunes  que  Balzac,  qui 
ecrivaient  en  vieux  gaulois  pendant  que  Balzac  ecrivait  eloquemment  et 
poliment  ?  " 

Cf .  D.  IV.  141,  Briseis,  E :  "  Je  sais  bien  que  dans  tous  les  siecles  on  ne 
juge  pas  des  choses  sur  le  meme  pied,  et  que  je  dois  consentir  qu'on  rabatte  de 
men  parallele  ce  qu'on  jugera  a  propos;  mais  jamais  on  ne  sauvera  le 
raisonnement  d'Horace;  et  au  pis  aller,  nous  connaitrons  qu'au  temps 
d'Homere  les  idees  de  la  raison  etaient  encore  bien  confuses, 
puisqu'Achille,  dans  I'lliade,  s'exprime  ainsi :  '  J'aimais  Briseis  de  tout 
mon  cceur,  quoique  la  force  des  armes  I'eCit  fait  toniber  entre  nics 
mains.'  " 

Bayle   criticises   Horace   for  alleging  the  love  of   Achilles   for   Briseis 
to  prove  that  it  is  allowable  to  love  a  servant.     Briseis  was  a  queen  in. 
captivity,  and  the  parallel  is  a  poor  one.     Bayle  merely  echoes  the  sen- 
timent of   Menage,  but  shows  that  he  agrees  with  him  fully. 

"  D.  I.  183,  Aconce,  D :  Bayle  quotes  le  pere  Rapin  and  grants  that  he 
is  merely  echoing  the  opinion  of  this  author  as  to  the  difference  between 
the  two   centuries. 


The  Function  of  the  Critic  109 

hardly  inclined  to  admit  that  it  is  especially  superior  in  this 
regard.^^ 

The  literary  changes  which  Bayle  mentions  seem  to  represent 
to  him  a  mere  swaying  to  and  fro,  rather  than  a  motion  which 
is  ever  steadily  in  one  direction.  This  idea  is  brought  out 
when  he  speaks  of  the  standards  of  modesty  maintained  in  novel 
writing. 

On  voit  regner  dans  cette  sorte  d'Ecrits  Ic  meme  flux  et  reflux  qui  se 
remarque  par  tout  ailleurs;  on  s'eloigne  d'un  certain  caractere,  et  puis 
on  y  retourne.  M.  d'Urfe  donna  plus  de  modestie  a  ses  personnages 
qu'on  n'avoit  fait  auparavant.  Ceux  qui  I'ont  suivi  ont  ete  encore  plus 
austeres,   mais  voila   que   Ton   se  raprochc   de   I'ancienne   licence." 

Methods  of  literar)'  expression  may  be  almost  wholly  a  matter 
of  chance,  Bayle  suggests,  in  referring  to  the  persistence  of 
the  pastoral  genre.  It  happened  that  Theocritus  pleased  \'irgil, 
and  that  the  Occident  has  accepted  the  literary  tastes  of  the 
Greeks  and  Romans — wherefore  pastorals  are  still  being  written. 
This  is  entirely  fortuitous.*'  Certainly  Bayle  has  little  idea  of 
any  evolution  in  letters.*'^  But  he  thinks  that  the  differences  as 
to  taste  in  different  ages  are  worth  noting,  and  various  refer- 
ences indicate  his  belief  that  in  judging  individual  authors  one 


"  D.  I.  14.  Abaris,  I.  Bayle  says  that  for  the  most  part  "  notre  siecle 
est  aussi  dupe  que  les  autres  "  in  listening  to  diviners,  would  be  prophets. 
etc.  O.  D.  I.  34:  "On  se  pique  dans  ce  siecle  d'etre  extremement 
eclaire:  cependant  on  n'a  peut-etre  jamais  eu  plus  de  hardiesse  a  debiter 
des  fables  visiblement  contradictoires "  (apropos  of  History).  O.  D.  I. 
555 :  "  Voila  de  ces  choses  ...  qui  oblige  plusieurs  personnes  a 
dire  .  .  .  que  notre  siecle,  avec  toutes  les  lumieres  dont  il  se  vante, 
est  plus  fou  que  les  precedens.  .  .  ."  Apropos  of  the  dragonnade 
in  France. 

Note,  however,  these  cases  where  Bayle  speaks  favorably  of  his  own 
age :  O.  D.  I.  L.  99,  Ixv :  "  les  lumieres  de  ce  siecle  delicat  et  savant," 
etc.:  O.  D.  I.  41,  xi :  Apropos  of  scientific  Academies  Ba\le  says: 
"Ainsi  nous  voila  dans  un  siecle  qui  va  devenir  de  jour  en  jour  plus 
eclaire,  de  sorte  que  tous  les  siecles  precedens  ne  seront  que  tenebres 
en  comparaison." 

"O.  D.  I.  651.  i. 

*'  O.  D.  I.  634. 

**Cf.  however.  O.  D.  II.  201.  Bayle  approves  a  passage  from  VEglise 
Protestante  justiHee  par  I'Eglise  Romainc,  wherein  is  a  suggestion  that 
poetic  standards  progress  from  age  to  age. 


no  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

should  take  into  account  the  standards  of  excellence  which  pre- 
vailed during  their  particular  periods.*^ 

There  is  another  factor  to  be  considered  in  the  judging  of  a 
book;  the  question  of  the  milieu  in  which  the  author  wrote.  At 
least  Bayle  suggests  this,  although  here  again  he  does  not  give 
any  definite  comment  on  the  subject.  There  are  various  refer- 
ences to  the  curiosity  of  those  who  like  to  know  about  the  lives 
of  authors  and  the  circumstances  under  which  their  works  are 
written,  and  Bayle  seems  to  think  that  it  is  worth  while  to  gratify 
such  curiosity. ^°  Apparently  he  thinks  that  these  data  may  have 
significance  in  the  criticising  of  a  book.^^ 

He  mentions  several  influences  which  may  have  some  effect  on 
an  author  and  his  productions.  He  has  nothing  to  say  as  to 
what  may  be  the  importance  of  woman  in  the  Republic  of  Let- 
ters, but  he  grants  that  the  sex 

a  ete  la  principale  occasion,  et  le  meilleur  instrument  de  la  civilite  et 
de  la  politesse  qui  s'est  vue  parmi  les  hommes.     .      .      .^" 

Court  life  gives  a  certain  polish  and  esprit,  but  does  not  develop 
the  solid  intelligence  able  to  grapple  with  the  problems  of 
theology  and  philosophy.^^  ]\Ien  of  letters  who  can  live  in  a 
big  city  have  a  very  distinct  advantage.^*  It  is  there  that  they 
can  count  on  a  good  supply  of  books,  that  they  can  hear  the  best 
teachers  and  draw  inspiration  from  conversations  with  the  most 
learned.    There  is  no  better  place  to  acquire  a  polished  correct- 


*°Cf.  D.  II.  283,  Aretin,  A:  "II  (Aretino)  etait  assez  bon  poete.  II 
faut  entendre  ceci  en  egard  a  ce  temps — la  .  .  .  ;"  cf.  D.  II.  584, 
Ausone :  "  Generalement  parlant,  il  y  a  des  duretes  dans  ses  manieres, 
et  dans  son  style;  mais  c'etait  plutot  le  defaut  du  siecle,  que  celui  de 
son  esprit."  Of  Ausonius.  For  similar  remarks,  cf.  D.  III.  24.  Badius, 
L;  D.  IV.  15,  Bossus;  D.  X.  338,  Marsus,  D. 

^"O.  D.  I.  134,  x;  O.  D.  I.  140,  ii;  O.  D.  I.  601,  viii;  O.  D.  III. 
508,  iii. 

"Cf.  O.  D.  I.  284,  iv;  O.  D.  I.  352,  vii;  O.  D.  I.  574,  iv;  O.  D.  I. 
678,  i ;  etc.  In  these  cases  Bayle  gives  such  details  himself  about  the 
authors  whose  works  he  describes,  with  the  implication  that  they  may 
have  a  bearing  on  the  criticism  of  the  books. 

■^'O.  D.  II.  283,  vii;  cf.  D.  IX.  215,  Lycurgue,  D;  O.  D.   II.  286.  xvii. 

"^  O.  D.  III.  99,  cliii.     This  is  part  of  an  argument  dc  circonstancc. 

"O.  D.  III.  503-7,  i,  ii:  cf.  O.  D.  I.  L.  47:  Bayle  recommends  his 
younger  brother  not  to  come  to  Paris  until  he  has  attained  some 
maturity. 


Tfie  Function  of  the  Critic  1 1 1 

ness  in  speech,  and  an  understanding  of  good  taste.  Country  life, 
to  be  sure,  has  its  advantages  for  those  who  need  quiet  medita- 
tion rather  than  many  books  and  associates ;  and  those  men  are 
happy  who  can  shift  from  city  to  country  as  they  like."  But 
writers  who  have  been  brought  up  in  provincial  surroundings 
labor  under  very  considerable  difficulties.  Bayle  mentions  the 
fact  that  the  beaux  csprits  of  a  capital  city  are  inclined  to  lay 
claim  to  a  distinct  superiority  over  those  of  the  provinces,  and 
he  is  ready  to  think  that  there  is  a  real  basis  for  this  claim.'*" 
Provincials  generally  retain  a  suggestion  of  their  country  rude- 
ness, however  much  they  may  have  gotten  away  from  the  influ- 
ence of  their  own  district.  Bayle  makes  one  or  two  remarks 
on  the  influence  of  his  home  life  on  a  man  of  letters.  There 
may  be  cases  where  an  author,  free  from  the  cares  of  marriage, 
makes  more  progress  than  a  family  man,  but  it  is  quite  impos- 
sible to  lay  down  any  hard  and  fast  rule  to  this  effect.  Often 
the  man  with  domestic  responsibilities  is  more  active  and  accom- 
plishes more  when  at  work  than  the  bachelor  who  has  plenty  of 
leisure  for  letters.'^ 

Beyond  these  remarks  there  is  hardly  any  suggestion  of  the 
influence  environment  may  have.     Bayle  lays  much  more  stress 


"  Bayle  adds :  "  II  f aut  avoiier  que  la  simple  profession  des  Lettres 
conduit  rarement  a  cette  fortune-la :  bien  des  Auteurs  sont  reduits  a 
loiier  des  chambres  proche  du  toit,  et  ne  peuvent  pas  paier  ponctuelle- 
ment  le  proprietaire,  ni  eviter  I'exploit  d'un  Sergent :  et  tant  s'en  f aut 
qu'ils  possedent  des  maisons  de  rechange,  ils  n'ont  gueres  qu'un  habit." 
O.  D.  III.  507,  ii. 

■^D.  XI.  330-1,  Pays,  B;  cf.  O.  D.  I.  305:  Bayle  is  speaking  of  the 
accusation  of  patavinity  made  against  Livy.  Note  the  following  remark 
apropos  of  this :  "  C'est  ainsi  peut-etre  qu'il  f  audroit  f  aire  pour  bien 
juger  des  censures  des  Ancijns :  il  faudroit  voir  comment  on  traiteroit 
en  ce  siecle  ceux  qui  se  trouveroient  en   semblable  cas." 

^^  D.  XIV.  502-3,  Usserius,  B :  The  remarks  are  made  apropos  of 
religious  controversial  writing;  cf.  D.  III.  25,  Baduel,  A:  Bayle  praises 
a  book  which  recommends  marriage  for  gens  de  lettres. 

Cf.  D.  XVI.  8,  Pref.  de  la  \e  Ed,  ii.  Bayle  is  glad,  for  his  own  writing, 
that  he  has   so  much  leisure. 

Cf.  O.  D.  I.  177,  Avertissement:  "  il  est  rare  de  voir  des  (A)  Tira- 
queaux  qui  se  signalent  egalemcnt  par  le  grand  nombre  de  leurs  pro- 
ductions spirituelles,  et  de  leurs  productions  corporelles." 

A.  "  Durant  30  annees  Tiraqueau  publia  un  Livre  et  fit  un  enfant  a 
sa  femme  tous  les  ans." 


112  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

upon  the  influence  of  time,  upon  the  importance  of  the  particular 
age  in  which  an  author  lives.  In  neither  case  does  he  treat  the 
subject  formally,  but  it  seems  indisputable  that  he  thinks  these 
things  factors  to  be  considered  by  the  critic. 

The  critic's  duties,  then,  are  clear-cut.  When  he  opens  a  book 
he  shall  be  as  nearly  unbiased  as  is  humanly  possible ;  he  shall 
bend  all  his  energies  to  finding  out  exactly  what  the  author 
says ;  and  he  shall  consider  the  circumstances  under  which  the 
book  was  written,  and  the  object  for  which  it  was  intended. 
Then  he  may  speak  with  absolute  freedom,  assured  that  criticism 
conducted  in  this  way  is  valuable. 


XI 

Summary  of   Bayle's  Opinions;   His  Characteristics   and 
Rank  as  a  Critic 

It  is  clear  that  with  Bayle  literature  is  hardly  a  matter  of 
art  and  that  he  is  not  a  man  of  artistic  discernment.  He  is 
interested  in  letters  because  he  is  interested  in  everything,  and 
he  talks  about  letters  because,  in  true  journalistic  fashion,  he 
has  ideas  to  express  on  all  subjects.  His  opinions  enlighten  us 
as  to  the  kind  of  man  he  was,  even  in  the  very  fact  that  they 
show  a  lack  of  c-esthetic  judgment,  and  they  are  to  some  extent 
a  suggestion  of  what  the  literary  tastes  of  the  following  cen- 
tury— really  Bayle's  own — will  be. 

The  calling  of  letters  is,  in  his  opinion,  a  dignified  and  serious 
one,  a  calling  which  demands  men  of  superior  qualities,  and 
which  may  be  expected  to  lift  them  above  common,  earthy  faults. 
High  ideals  of  conduct  are  required.  When  writers  disagree 
among  themselves  their  disputes  must  be  settled  in  the  spirit  of 
courtesy  which  the  character  of  their  work  should  develop. 
Those  who  enter  this  profession  must  not  be  self-seeking  nor 
mercenary ;  authorship  must  not  be  a  petty  occupation  under- 
taken by  little  men  with  base  aims.  The  whole  attitude  of 
Bayle  towards  authors  and  towards  their  productions  shows  that 
his  curiosity  is  not  the  mere  idle  curiosity  of  a  man  who  is 
concerned  with  the  problems  of  philosophy  and  religion  and 
who  occasionally  turns  to  literature  because  it  is  an  interesting 
manifestation  of  human  activity.  The  attraction  which  draws 
Bayle  to  literature  is  strong  and  well  sustained.  But  it  is  that 
part  which  is  least  literary,  least  artistic — it  is  the  part  concerned 
with  positive,  tangible  facts,  which  occupies  him.  A  man  of 
brains  and  not  of  feelings,  whose  intellectual  side  was  highly 
developed  and  his  artistic  sense  not  at  all,  he  cares  most  for 
letters  when  they  touch  on  RcaVicn.  That  any  one  should  put 
his  whole  soul  into  a  book  is  an  idea  wholly  foreign  to  Bayle. 
A  book  is  a  thing  apart  from  the  man,  an  expression  of  his 


114  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

brain-power  but  not  of  his  personality.  Literature  is  imper- 
sonal, and  not  a  matter  of  artistic  expression  even  objective: 
for  Bayle,  as  we  have  said,  its  connection  with  sesthetics  is 
remote. 

His  attitude  towards  the  various  genres  brings  this  out  clearly. 

Fiction  is  not  a  method  of  artistic  idealization.  At  best  it 
does  not  interest  Bayle  greatly,  not  enough  to  incline  him  to 
express  any  very  definite  opinions.  All  novels  are  alike  to  him; 
the  Princesse  de  Cleves  and  Ariane  awaken  the  same  amount 
of  enthusiasm.  The  possibilities  of  the  novel  as  a  means  of 
presenting  various  phases  of  human,  breathing  life,  as  a  means 
of  offering  to  mankind  studies  in  life  which  shall  lead  to  broader, 
saner  conceptions  of  existence — this  is  nothing  to  our  phil- 
osopher. He  speaks,  indeed,  of  truth  in  relation  to  novel  writ- 
ing; his  interest  in  truth  leads  him  to  demand  attention  to 
vraisemhlance  and  to  demand  it  with  some  insistence.  But 
verity,  for  him,  is  positive  and  substantial  and  not  a  conception 
in  which  idealizations  and  things  felt  rather  than  known  or  fully 
understood,  have  a  place.  He  objects  to  the  practice  of  mingling 
fiction  with  historical  facts.  His  views  on  this  point  are  enlight- 
ening. A  conception  of  art  that  is  based  on  truth  of  the  tangible 
kind,  but  that  seeks  to  re-present  this  truth  in  a  clearer  light — 
such  an  idea  is  wholly  absent  from  Bayle's  scheme  of  things. 
The  truth  of  the  positive  sort  is  too  sacred  to  be  contaminated 
in  such  a  way ;  this  is  the  only  kind  of  truth  that  Bayle  knows. 
He  is  interested  in  the  effect  that  novels  may  have  on  morals, 
but  it  is  the  immediate  and,  so  to  speak,  the  smaller  effect — 
the  directly  practical  one — that  concerns  him.  Does  a  novel 
that  presents  immoral  facts  of  life  lead  its  readers  to  wicked- 
ness? He  is  inclined  to  think  so.  Whether  a  novel  may  havcj 
a  wider  moral  significance,  whether  it  may  affect  rules  of  right- 
living  less  directly,  but  more  deeply,  does  not  occur  to  Bayle.j 
For  him  the  novel  is  a  small  thing,  essentially  a  love  story  of 
swain  and  his  lady.  The  subject  is  to  be  dropped  as  soon  asl 
the  pair  are  happily  wed.  Though  the  Princesse  de  Cleves  in- 
terests him,  he  declares  his  disapproval  of  a  romance  that  deals] 
with  married  folk. 

It  would  not  be  fair  to  judge  Bayle  simply  on  the  basis  of  j 
what  he  thinks  of  fiction,  to  declare  that  he  is  not  an  artist 
merely  because  he  fails  to  appreciate  novels.     The  novel  in  hisj 


Sicnimary  of  Bayle's  Opinions,  Etc.  1 1 5 

day  was  still  in  crude  form ;  he  had  little  that  was  really  good 
by  which  to  form  his  taste.  But  poetry,  drama  and  oratory  were 
not  by  any  means  in  this  early  stage  of  development,  and  yet 
his  opinions  on  these  forms  of  artistic  expression  indicate  the 
same  point  of  view. 

It  has  been  noted  that  to  him  poetry  is  frivolous,  a  jexi  d'csprit. 
As  Sainte-Beuve^  remarks,  Bayle  never  tried  his  own  hand  at 
poetic  composition.  Certainly  the  product  would  not  have  been 
remarkable.  Bayle  is  absolutely  without  any  conception  of  the 
role  that  a  poet  may  play.  He  speaks  with  more  scorn  of  this 
class  of  writers  than  of  any  other.  That  a  poet  should  ever  be 
considered  worthy  to  guide  his  fellows,  to  give  them  a  glimpse 
of  the  light  of  the  world,  through  the  power  of  his  own  vision, 
that  a  \'igny  should  declare  the  poet  the  far-seeing  pilot  who 
perceives  directions  more  readily  than  his  mates  and  chooses 
a  course  more  wisely  than  they — such  an  idea  would  have 
astounded  Bayle.  The  only  effect  which  these  "  impudent  versi- 
fiers "  have  upon  their  fellows  is  immediate  and  practical :  their 
obscenities  and  impieties  are  demoralizing.  The  only  good  Bayle 
sees  in  poetry  is  concerned  with  matters  of  fact.  A  man  with 
some  of  the  feelings  that  impel  the  poet,  and  his  brother  the 
orator,  may  turn  these  to  good  advantage  in  the  composition 
of  a  history,  and  add  to  his  narrative  dignity  and  vividness. 
Here  is  a  glimmer  of  understanding.  But  it  is  rare  for  Bayle 
to  admit  any  value  in  the  possession  of  such  feelings.  A  single 
remark  is  enough  to  reveal  his  attitude  towards  poetry :  he  states 
that  a  poet  who  has  written  a  clever  eulogy  on  tobacco  may  be 
expected  to  express  in  eloquent  verse  his  indignation  at  an 
injustice.^ 

Drama  interests  him  to  the  same  extent  as  fiction  and  poetry. 
Dramatic^  poets  awaken  no  respect.  All  productions  attract  his 
attention  in  a  certain  measure,  but  he  cares  as  much  for  one 
as  for  another.  Lcs  Fcmmes  Savantes  and  Psyche  appeal  to 
him  equally,  and  he  is  quite  as  curious  about  Arlcqnin  Procurcur. 
The  Iphigcnie  of  Racine  entertains  him.  so  does  the  preface — 
he  hardly  knows  which  he  likes  better.  He  has  something  to 
say  about  the  Amphitryon  of  Plautus,  drawn  to  this  especially, 
it  may  be,  because  the  play  involves  details  that  are  somewhat 

^Portraits  Litteraires,  I.  ^,76. 
'  Cf .  supra,  p.  24,  n.   12. 


1 16  Tlie  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

scahreux.  He  maintains  that  Amphitryon  is  not  given  an  impor- 
tant enough  place  in  the  drama,  a  place  fitting  the  role  he  plays. 
The  principle  here  is  a  sound  one,  but  Bayle's  criticism  is  not 
based  on  the  facts,  for  he  is  mistaken  in  his  view  that  Amphi- 
tryon is  overshadowed  by  Creon.^  Evidently  Bayle  is  not  suf- 
ficiently familiar  with  his  Plautus.  The  artistic  value  of  the  Cid 
makes  no  appeal  to  him,  and  Chimene  seems  abominable. 

The  general  remarks  made  concerning  the  genre  are  prac- 
tical in  character.  What  is  the  direct  moral  effect?  It  may  be 
good  or  otherwise,  says  Bayle ;  something  may  be  accomplished 
in  curing  the  petty  vices  of  men,  or  impiety  and  crime  may  be 
promoted.  What  is  the  standard  for  dramatic  productions  ?  The 
taste  of  the  people.  That  is,  the  drama  is  a  divertissement  for 
the  people ;  they  may  be  entertained,  and  incidentally  improved 
in  some  of  their  minor  weaknesses — a  viewpoint  wholly  prac- 
tical and  typical.  Doubtless  Bayle  would  see  no  value  in  a  piece 
of  dramatic  writing  which  is  not  put  on  the  stage,  which  does 
not  aim  to  correct  some  particular  error  in  maurs  and  which 
counts  only  as  a  vivid,  true  and  moving  portrayal  of  human 
passions,  strivings,  idealizations.  The  truth  of  which  Bayle 
speaks  in  connection  with  the  drama  is  once  more  of  a  positive 
sort.  Whether  there  is  any  ideal  truth  in  a  dramatic  presenta- 
tion he  does  not  ask.  What  he  wants  to  know  is  whether  his- 
torical facts  have  been  adhered  to,  or  whether  the  facts  of  every- 
day existence  have  been  treated  with  respect.  The  opera  has  only 
one  interest  for  Bayle,  the  stage  effects.  Music  is  nothing  to 
him. 

Oratory  is  a  matter  of  the  feelings,  not  of  the  brain.  Orators 
work  on  their  own  passions  and  appeal  to  the  passions  of  the 
audience,  they  do  not  use  learning  or  reasoning.  They  strive  to 
dazzle,  they  distort  the  vision.  With  such  men  Bayle  has 
naturally  little  sympathy.  He  accepts  this  state  of  affairs  more 
from  indifference  than  from  anything  else ;  when  he  makes  any 
positive  criticism  it  is  unfavorable.  The  beauties  of  eloquence, 
the  clan  which  sometimes  carries  away  both  the  speaker  and  his 
hearers,  the  splendid  enthusiasm  which  an  orator  may  devote  ta 
a  noble  purpose — these  have  no  charm  for  the  dispassionate 
Bayle. 


CI.  supra,  p.  32,  n.  27. 


Summary  of  Baylc's  Opinions,  Etc.  1 17 

Style  is  not  an  artistic  process  for  him.  I'cauty  in  style  is  not 
recommended,  means  nothing  to  him ;  the  ornaments  of  style 
seem  trifling,  lie  advocates  clearness,  conciseness,  correctness. 
He  objects  to  the  poverty  of  language,  not  because  it  limits 
man's  power  to  express  the  beautiful,  but  because  it  cramps  him 
in  his  efforts  to  present  conceptions  of  things,  of  facts,  in  an 
absolutely  clear,  clean-cut  way.  Euphony  is  much  less  desirable 
than  clearness.  Fact  is  always  to  be  given  the  precedence  over 
beauty. 

When  he  speaks  of  individual  authors  it  is  evident  once  more 
tiiat  the  artistic  side  is  not  what  interests  Bayle.*  The  Dic- 
tionary is  decidedly  meagre  in  its  accounts  of  men  of  letters ;  not 
many  are  mentioned,  and,  when  they  are,  the  stress  is  laid  almost 
wholly  on  the  facts  of  their  lives,  or  on  their  various  activities 
outside  of  literature  proper.  In  these  articles  there  is  hardly'' 
any  real  literary  criticism.  Bayle's  opinions  on  these  men  have 
often  to  be  gleaned  from  passing  remarks  scattered  throughout 
his  works.  It  becomes  evident  that  what  interests  him  here,  as 
elsewhere,  is  the  positive  side.  Homer  is  praised  especially  for 
the  attention  he  pays  to  vraiscmhlancc:'  Virgil  is  also  praised 
for  vraiscmhlancc,*^  and  a  good  part  of  the  criticism  on  this  poet 
is  concerned  with  the  question  of  his  doctrines  on  Hades  and 
on  infernal  punishment.^  \^irgirs  use  of  a  certain  epithet  is 
discussed  from  the  point  of  view  of  accuracy ;  whether  illaudatus 
was  a  fit  and  correct  adjective  to  apply  to  a  tyrant.*  The 
obscenities  in  ^  irgil  are  mentioned,'*  and  there  is  some  comment 
on  the  license,  in  a  similar  case,  which  Ovid  permitted  himself.^" 
Besides  the  salctcs,  what  occupies  Bayle  especially  in  speaking 
of  the  latter  poet  is  the  description  of  Chaos  in  the  Mctamor- 


*  The  next  four  paragraphs  contain  various  remarks  of  Bayle  which 
were  treated  in  the  present  study  in  the  chapter  on  Individual  Authors. 
Since  that  chapter  is  omitted  in  the  dissertation  as  here  printed  (cf. 
supra.  Preface,  p.  6)  the  more  important  references  in  this  case  are 
reproduced  in  footnotes. 

=  0.  D.  III.  366;  D.  IV.  393.  Guise  (4).  O:  D.  XI.  537.  Penelope,  D. 

'O.  D.  III.  349:  O.  D.  II.  488,  ii. 

'O.  D.  III.  962-3;  O.  D.  III.  878. 

'D.   IV  274-6,  Busiris,   B. 

'D.  XIV.  424-5,  Virgile,  A. 

'"D.  XI.  288,  Ovide,  A. 


1 1 8  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

phoses;'^^  here  Bayle  launches  into  a  long  discussion  of  the 
ancients'  conception  of  the  beginning  of  the  world.  Of  the  other 
ancient  poets  there  is  only  cursory  mention.  Lucretius,  of  course, 
occupies  Bayle's  attention  for  some  time  on  account  of  his  sig- 
nificance as  a  philosopher.^^  For  Lycophron  he  manifests  esteem, 
not  on  account  of  his  poetic  genius,  but  because  he  must  have 
been  clever  to  compose  verse  so  obscure  and  complex." 

When  our  author  does  turn  from  matters  of  fact  to  dis- 
cussions of  the  artistic  values  of  poetic  creations,  he  fails  utterly. 
He  does  not  understand  Virgil  and  Homer  at  all.  He  speaks 
with  as  much  enthusiasm  of  the  fables  of  ^sop,^*  as  he  does  of 
the  Greek  epic.  The  dignity  and  simplicity  of  the  ancients  are 
to  him  a  ridiculous  naivete.  What  nonsense  to  represent  Ulysses, 
a  great  hero,  as  a  hewer  of  wood  and  builder  of  boats  !^^  How 
absurd  for  Phoenix  to  stop  and  tell  nursery  tales  to  Achilles  when 
he  is  the  bearer  of  an  important  message  to  that  warrior  \^*^  Here 
Bayle  altogether  misses  the  point,  and  doubtless  he  is  not  over 
familiar  with  the  incident  of  Phoenix  referring  to  the  boyhood 
days  of  Achilles  in  the  effort  to  stir  the  blood  of  that  sullen 
hero.  The  adventures  of  Dido  and  .^^neas  have  nothing  that  is 
romantic  or  poetic  for  Bayle.  He  suggests  that  the  treatment 
^neas  accorded  the  lady  was  abominable. ^^  And  as  for  Dido, 
he  sees  nothing  but  a  vulgar,  bourgeois  sentiment  in  her  ex- 
pression : 

.     Si  quis  mihi  parvulus  aula 
Luderet  ^neas " 

Bayle  is  as  little  interested  in  the  modern  poets  as  in  the 
ancient.  Ronsard  and  Malherbe  are  given  characteristic  articles 
in  the  Dictionary:  that  is,  literary  criticism  is  almost  absent. 
Marot  is  commented  on  more  at  length  and  the  remarks  reveal 
the  uncertainty  of  Bayle's  judgment.  For  him  Marot  is  superior 
to  all  the  sixteenth  century,  the  Pleiad  containing  no  poets  who 
may  be  compared  with  him,  and  is  hardly  surpassed  at  all.  except 

"  D.  XI.  285,  Ovide. 
'^D.  IX.  507-33,  Lucrece. 
"D.  IX.  210,  Lycophron   (2). 
"D.  VI.  282,  Esope  (2),  G. 
"  O.  D.  IV.  535- 
"  Cf.  supra,  pp.  91-2. 
"O.  D.  I.  92,  IV. 
'*  Cf .  supra,  p.  92. 


Summary  of  Bayle's  Opinions,  Etc.  119 

by  such  men  as  Sarazin  and  Bcnscrade.*"  The  two  seventeenth 
century  poets  for  whom  Bayle  has  the  most  esteem  are  Mohere*" 
and  La  Fontaine;-^  of  these  his  high  opinion  is  manifest,  i'er- 
haps  it  is  not  surprising  that  his  choice  should  fall  on  these  two, 
who  are  both  endowed  with  intensely  human  qualities,  who  are 
interested  in  real  life,  and  are  not  inclined  to  the  filmy  idealiza- 
tions for  which  he  could  have  felt  little  sympathy,  liayle's 
judgment  in  praising  these  two  is  certainly  commendable.  But 
the  freedom  with  which  he  bestows  his  praise  betrays  his  lack 
of  discernment.  He  names  Boileau  grand  poctc,-'^  but  is  quite 
as  willing  to  give  that  title  to  the  obscure  Pierre  Fransz.--' 

The  prose  writers  interest  him  more,  but  here  again  the  same 
tendency  to  turn  wholly  to  facts  is  evident.  In  speaking  of 
Plutarch  he  does  not  ask  what  may  be  the  value  of  the  Lives 
as  a  series  of  vivid  pictures  of  the  ancients,  wherein  their  own 
human  selves  are  brought  before  the  reader,  wherein  the  spirit 
of  these  men  and  of  their  times  is  made  manifest.  The  more 
tangible  things  are  what  strike  Bayle,  the  mistakes  in  fact  which 
Plutarch  makes,-*  the  intentional  distorting  of  facts  at  times,-"'  a 
piece  of  reasoning  that  is  evidently  bad.-*''  Cicero  is  a  marvellous 
orator.  But  the  quality  of  his  style  which  impresses  Bayle  most 
is  its  clearness. ^^  The  work  of  Cicero  which  brings  forth  the 
most  comment  is  the  Letters,-^  and  in  them  what  interests  him 
above  all  is  the  historical  feature,  the  references  to  actual  or 
probable  occurrences.  Considerable  comment  is  given  the  his- 
torians and  Bayle  has  a  high  respect  for  men  like  Livy,-"  Sue- 
tonius'" and  Tacitus. ^^  To  the  modern  prose  writers  he  pays 
much  more  attention  than  to  the  modern  poets.     His  criticisms 


"D.  X.  313,  Marot. 

"D.  XII.  252-64,  Poquelin;  O.  D.  I.  L.  22;  Gigas,  72. 

"D.  VI.  283,  Esope  (2),  G;  O.  D.  I.  374,  viii. 

"D.  II.  419,  Arnauld  (4),  T. 

"O.  D.  I.  L.  140,  xciii. 

'"D.  VIII.  513,  Junon,  T;   D.  V.  200,  Cimon,   H. 

"D.  I.  164.  Achille  (2),  M. 

^  D.  IX.  22,2,  Lycurgue,  H. 

"O.  D.  I.  169. 

=«0.  D.  I.  55,  vii. 

^O.  D.  I.  L.  33;  0.  D.  III.  II,  V. 

"D.  XIII.  547,  Suetone. 

'^D.  XIV.  7,  Tacite. 


I20  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

are  of  the  stereotyped  variety  in  many  cases,  but  he  has  a  genu- 
ine esteem  for  men  like  Balzac^-  who  have  done  much  to  clarify 
French  style,  and  for  thinkers  and  savants  like  Montaigne,^^  Fon- 
tenelle,^*  Saint-Evremond,^^  La  Mothe  Le  Vayer,^*^  Patin^"  and 
Menage.^* 

The  interest  which  Bayle  takes  in  manifestations  of  literary 
activity  other  than  those  mentioned — in  genres  other  than  poetry, 
oratory  and  the  like — simply  brings  additional  evidence  to  prove 
that  he  was  an  intellectual  and  not  an  artist. 

History  is  a  matter  of  facts  for  him,  a  chronicle  of  the  things 
done  by  men  in  their  various  political  relations.  He  insists,  to 
be  sure,  upon  investigation  into  causes ;  with  any  superficial  list 
of  dates  and  happenings  he  is  not  content.  But,  in  the  last 
analysis,  history  is  still  such  a  list,  although  lengthened  and 
completed  and  with  the  interrelations  of  the  various  facts  to  some 
extent  established.  Bayle  has  no  notion  of  going  still  further, 
of  getting  at  the  ideas  which  lie  back  of  the  various  groups  of 
facts ;  it  does  not  occur  to  him  to  treat  history  in  a  broader  way, 
to  treat  of  the  meaning  of  religious,  philosophical,  literary  and 
humanitarian  ideas  in  their  relation  to  history.  It  does  strike 
him  indeed,  as  we  have  said  above  in  speaking  of  poetry,  that 
the  artistic,  idealistic  sense  of  a  poet  or  an  orator  may  be  helpful 
to  a  historian,  may  lend  vividness  and  dignity  to  his  writing. 
But  he  does  not  dwell  on  the  idea  at  any  length  and  does  not 
explain  exactly  what  he  means ;  it  is  not  certain  that  he  sees 
here  anything  more  than  a  somewhat  superficial  advantage.  He 
suggests  that  the  artist's  sense  helps  in  the  presentation  of  the 
historical  material,  he  does  not  say  whether  that  feeling  enables 
him  to  approach  a  historical  subject  with  more  understanding 
and  grasp  its  significance  more  completely.  As  to  style,  the  prime 
requisite  is  clearness.  Vividness  is  desirable — doubtless  because 
it  enables  the  historian  to  make  his  facts  more  positive  and  real. 
Certainly  it  is  the  substantial,  tangible  element  that  attracts  Bayle. 


D.  III.  67,  Balzac  (2). 

D.  VI.  260,  Ermite,  I. 
■0.  D.  I.  547. 
'O.  D.  III.  535-6. 
'D.  XIV.   303.  Vayer,  K. 

D.  XI.  444,  Patin. 
'  D.  X.  398,  Menage. 


Summary  of  Bayle's  Opinions,  Etc.  i2i 

For  scholarship,  of  course,  his  cntliusiasni  is  marked.  Here 
we  are  still  more  in  the  realm  of  facts.  It  is  to  be  noted  how  our 
author's  interest  increases  as  we  get  away  from  the  region  of 
ideals  and  approach  Rcalicn.  As  a  scholar  himself  P.ayle  was 
indefatigable.  Scholarship  he  defends  vigorously  against  its 
would-be  detractors.  He  lays  down  precepts  with  nothing  of  the 
nonchalant  manner  which  characterized  his  criticisms  in  fiction, 
poetry  and  like  fields.  Here  is  something  really  worthy  of  occu- 
pying his  attention ;  a  calling  at  which  a  man  may  spend  many 
long  years  with  profit  to  himself  and  to  his  fellows. 

Manifestly  Rayle  is  less  interested  in  art  than  in  facts.  The 
cool,  hard-thinking  philosopher  of  Rotterdam  had  little  enthusi- 
asm for  the  beautiful,  and  little  understanding  of  it.  But  to  say 
he  lacks  artistic  sense  is  not  to  say  he  lacks  keenness :  clever  and 
discerning  he  undoubtedly  is. 

The  rules  for  reading  which  he  lays  down  for  the  edification 
of  his  brother  are  admirable ;  they  show  that  Bayle  believes  in  a 
careful,  thoughtful,  discriminating  perusal  of  books.  It  is  use- 
less to  read,  he  says,  unless  the  ideas  of  an  author  are  under- 
stood in  their  full  significance ;  a  hasty,  superficial  examination 
brings  no  profit. 

In  view  of  the  enormous  amount  of  Bayle's  reading,  and  in 
view  of  the  nature  of  the  Nouvelles,  where  notices  of  many  books 
were  given  each  month,  it  seems  likely  that  he  himself  was  far 
from  a  slow  reader.  He  had  to  cover  ground  rapidly — and  un- 
doubtedly he  was  able  to  do  so.  Sainte-Beuve  is  eminently  just 
in  according  him  the  quick  sagacity  characteristic  of  a  journalist. 
The  ready  accuracy  of  the  criticisms  in  the  Nouvelles  testify  to 
Bayle's  ability  to  pick  out,  in  an  instant,  the  good  and  the  bad 
points  of  a  production.  His  skill,  too.  in  giving  a  brief  summary 
of  the  contents  of  a  book,  so  that  every  salient  feature  is  brought 
before  the  reader,  indicates  the  ease  with  which  he  grasped  the 
significance  of  a  piece  of  work.  Few  of  the  notices  in  the  Nou- 
velles deal  with  books  from  the  point  of  view  of  their  artistic 
worth,  and  where  they  do  it  is  evident  that  Bayle's  comments 
are  not  particularly  valuable.  But  the  excellence  of  his  criti- 
cisms where  matters  of  fact  are  concerned,  where  it  is  a  question 
of  historical  truth,  or  of  positive  reasoning  in  philosophy,  religion, 
science — the  value  of  these  is  indisputable.     And  when   Bayle 


12  2  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

takes  up  literary  topics  from  the  matter  of  fact  side,  the  same 
discernment  is  noteworthy.  In  literature,  as  well  as  elsewhere, 
he  is  a  keen  thinker. 

He  sees  at  once  the  clumsiness  of  which  Plutarch  is  guilty  in 
the  course  of  his  argument  concerning  the  advantages  of  study 
to  women.  He  understands  that  a  dramatist  needs  to  draw  cer- 
tain lines  with  a  heavy  pencil  in  his  portrayal  of  character,  so 
as  to  call  the  attention  of  the  audience  to  particular  traits.  He 
well  understands  that  there  is  in  comedy  an  element  w^hich  is 
universal  and  an  element  which  is  local,  and  that,  in  rendering 
judgment,  this  fact  must  not  be  lost  sight  of.  He  appreciates 
exactly  the  force  of  La  Rochefoucauld's  maxims,  their  keen- 
cutting  quality,  the  esprit,  the  suggestion  of  malice  and  mis- 
anthropy which  permeates  them  and  which  is  apt  to  develop  in 
the  reader  a  similar  spirit.  Homer's  description  of  Helen  makes 
a  particular  appeal  to  him,  the  description  wherein  there  is  no 
attempt  to  portray  her  beauty,  feature  by  feature,  but  merely  a 
reference  to  the  impression  she  makes  on  the  Trojan  counsellors. 
Bayle  perceives  the  force  of  leaving  the  details  to  the  reader's 
imagination,  and  feels  that  Helen  must  indeed  have  been  mar- 
velously  fair.  He  sees  the  poor  taste  of  over-crowding  a  poem 
with  minute  references  to  fable  and  antiquity.  He  appreciates 
the  fact  that  the  charm  of  a  satire  lies  in  its  subtlety,  in  the 
cleverness  of  the  veiled  allusions.  He  well  understands  that 
language  is  inadequate,  a  poor  instrument  which  often  fails 
to  give  to  man's  conceptions  a  clear  and  satisfactory  expression. 

The  precepts  laid  down  for  historical  and  scholarly  work  are 
sound.  The  thoroughness  advocated  is  of  the  discriminating 
kind.  Great  attention  to  detail  is  recommended  but  the  result 
is  to  be  something  more  than  a  mass  of  details ;  the  scholar  must 
be  more  than  a  compiler,  must  use  his  brains,  exercise  his  power 
of  selection,  produce  a  piece  of  work  that  bears  evidence  of  a 
careful,  investigating,  discerning  intelligence.  The  scholar  must 
know  where  attention  to  erudite  minutiae  is  called  for  and  where 
it  is  out  of  place.  Bayle  recognizes  two  kinds  of  scholars,  and 
gives  the  higher  place  to  those  with  broad  sane  minds,  to  those . 
who  can  put  dry  facts  together  and  make  a  living  structure  of 
them,  who  can  divine  the  fundamental  relations  of  things  and 
work  out  theories  from  them. 

The  remarks  on  criticism  show    the    same    careful    thinker. 


Sut)imary  of  Bayle's  Opinions,  Etc.  123 

Bayle  understands  why  the  judgment  of  a  few  experts  may  be 
much  superior  to  the  oi)inions  of  a  multitude  of  laymen  who 
have  no  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  details  involved  in  the 
production  of  some  piece  of  work.  He  dwells  with  considerable 
insistence  on  this  point — although,  true  to  his  positive  and  matter 
of  fact  character,  he  grants  there  may  often  be  practical  reasons 
for  following  the  judgment  of  the  people.  Bayle  has  the  his- 
torical point  of  view  to  a  much  greater  extent  than  his  con- 
temporaries. He  has  some  understanding  of  how  methods  of 
literar>'  expression  may  vary  according  to  time  and  environment. 
He  sets  forth  no  formal  doctrine  on  the  subject,  but  he  has 
thought  about  it,  and  his  powers  of  perception  have  enabled  him 
to  see  that  temps  and  milieu  are  undoubtedly  factors  of  impor- 
tance in  the  matter  of  literar>-  production.  He  perceives  this 
more  than  a  century  before  Taine  and  Hennequin. 

Xo  mean  critic,  then,  is  Bayle.  Certainly  his  comments  are 
sornetimes  enlightening  and  sometimes  reveal  a  fine  understand- 
ing of  what  he  has  to  criticise.  Furthermore  these  comments 
bring  out  various  characteristics  which  are  typical  of  him  in  all 
fields. 

That  he  interests  himself  in  everything,  that  his  curiosity  is 
universal,  is  apparent.  The  very  fact  that  he  pays  so  much 
attention  to  things  literary  proves  this — so  much  attention  to  a 
kind  of  intellectual  activity  which  would  hardly  be  in  the  province 
of  the  philosopher  and  controversialist.  The  long  list  of  indi- 
vidual authors  about  whom  he  has  some  comment  to  offer  shows 
how  writers  of  all  sorts  attracted  his  attention.  And  the  state- 
ments which  he  makes  on  the  subject  of  how  many  books  he 
reads  and  how  he  skips  from  one  to  another  are,  in  themselves, 
enough  to  demonstrate  his  remarkable  avidity  for  knowledge  in 
whatever  form. 

It  is  evident,  too,  that  Bayle  is  no  respecter  of  tradition,  of 
authority  and  set  rules.  He  launches  boldly  into  discussions  of 
the  general  value  of  a  method  of  literary  expression,  and  when 
he  thinks  a  genre  is  frivolous  he  speaks  freely.  No  reverence 
for  the  great  masters  of  verse  holds  him  back  either  in  discussing 
their  art  as  a  whole,  or  their  individual  productions.  He  accepts 
the  standard  judgment  of  Homer  as  the  greatest  of  all  bards,  but 
he  does  not  hesitate  to  censure  him  with  vigor.  Virgil  is  a  great 
poet,  but  he  has  numerous  faults  w^hich  Bayle  bluntly  brings  up. 


124  ^^^^  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

Boileau  is  the  great  poet  of  his  time,  but  Hke  the  rest  has  weak- 
nesses. In  no  case  does  Bayle  set  up  any  man  as  his  Hterarj^ 
hero,  in  no  case  does  tradition,  reputation,  reverence  or  anything 
else  keep  him  from  declaring  his  opinion  without  constraint. 

The  ancients  inspire  no  awe.  Their  ideas  in  many  things  are 
absurd,  their  mythology  is  nonsense.  Bayle  is  fair  towards  them ; 
he  does  not  hesitate  to  pay  honor  where  he  thinks  honor  due. 
But  where  it  strikes  him  that  the  literary  worth  of  some  classic 
production  is  slight,  he  says  so;  he  is  by  no  means  subject  to  the 
"  malady  "  of  those  who  think  that  anything  found  in  one  of  the 
ancient  authors  is  right.  Indeed,  in  the  differences  between  the 
Ancient  and  Alodern  camps,  he  leans  to  the  moderns ;  without 
taking  sides  definitely  he  shows  that  in  that  direction  lie  his 
sympathies. 

The  remarks  on  scholarship  and  on  history  indicate  the  same 
lack  of  respect  for  tradition,  the  same  tendency  to  doubt,  the 
same  manifestation  of  Bayle's  great  characteristic,  his  scepticism. 
Facts  of  learning,  facts  of  history,  are  not  to  be  accepted  as  such, 
unless  there  is  ample  reason  to  believe  in  them.  The  names  of 
the  greatest  historians  do  not  inspire  such  respect  that  he  hesi- 
tates on  occasion  to  criticise  them.  The  greatest  savants  make 
mistakes ;  Bayle  is  not  willing  to  take  their  word  for  a  fact 
when  he  can  control  the  sources  himself.  In  history  tradition 
carries  no  conviction,  indeed  it  is  one  of  the  surest  methods  of 
handing  down  falsehoods.  With  Bayle  no  long  list  of  authorities 
and  great  names  suffices  to  counterbalance  the  weight  of  docu- 
mentary evidence. 

It  has  been  pointed  out  by  writers  on  Bayle  that  the  universal 
scepticism  which  was  characteristic  of  him  resulted -in  a  universal 
spirit  of  tolerance  equally  typical.  The  fact  is  particularly  evi- 
dent in  the  criticism  here  dealt  with.  This  inclination  to  doubt 
which  is  so  manifest  in  Bayle  in  matters  of  history  and  learning, 
is  always  accompaned  by  a  readiness  to  be  tolerant.  It  is  per- 
missible, he  says,  for  scholars  to  engage  in  disputes  among 
themselves,  indeed  it  is  desirable,  for  such  disputes  often  lead 
to  advances  in  knowledge.  But  fairness  and  respect  for  the 
opinions  of  others  must  characterize  such  discussions ;  there  is 
no  excuse  for  them  unless  conducted  in  a  gentlemanly  spirit. 
Nowhere  does  Bayle  insist  on  tolerance  with  more  vigor  than 
in  the  remarks  on  history.     He  treats  of  partiality  more  fully 


Summary  of  Baylv's  Opinions,  Etc.  125 

than  of  any  other  phase  of  the  subject,  he  discusses  the  wide- 
spread practice  of  being  partial  and  the  way  prejudice  is  mani- 
fested in  the  historian,  in  the  witnesses  on  whom  he  has  to  call, 
and  in  the  reading  public,  lie  deplores  every  manifestaticjn  of 
this  evil,  lie  grants  the  extreme  difficulty  of  being  imi)artial 
and  does  not  expect  that  it  will  be  possible  to  avoid  all  bias.  IJut 
the  ert'ort  to  do  this  he  sets  up  as  the  historian's  First  Com- 
mandment. 

No  attitude  could  be  more  tolerant  than  that  recommended  by 
P.ayle  in  his  remarks  on  criticism.  A  critic  shall  make  every 
eft'ort  to  treat  his  author  with  all  fairness,  shall  show  every 
consideration  for  him,  shall  find  out  exactly  his  aims  and  the 
circumstances  under  which  he  writes.  When  this  is  done  the 
critic  may  speak  freely.  And  the  author  in  question  is  to  exercise 
tolerance  on  his  side,  is  to  recognize  the  fair  and  equitable  spirit 
which  prompts  the  remarks  and  accept  them  as  such. 

Bayle  is  a  free  lance,  wdiose  activity  carries  him  into  all  fields 
of  literature,  whose  bold  liberal  spirit  prompts  him  to  criticise 
everything  that  comes  under  his  hand.  His  keenness  enables  him 
to  see  the  weak  point  in  every  opinion,  the  uncertain  basis  upon 
which  all  of  man's  ideas  are  founded.  His  innate  sense  of  jus- 
tice makes  him  realize  that  it  is  not  fair  for  an  individual  to 
declare  false  all  views  except  his  own.  The  opinions  of  one's 
neighbor  may  be  quite  as  good,  and  certainly  are  to  be  respected. 
In  literature  as  elsewhere  Bayle  is  the  universal  doubter  and  the 
universal  tolerant. 


XII 
Influence  of  Bayle 

The  influence  of  Bayle  on  the  following  age  is  far-reaching. 
Many  of  the  ideas  of  the  eighteenth  century  may  be  directly  traced 
to  him.  No  study  of  the  refugee  at  Rotterdam  would  be  com- 
plete without  a  reference  to  that  influence,  and  the  present  dis- 
sertation may  well  conclude  with  a  brief  mention  of  how  his 
precepts,  those  on  literature  among  the  rest,  were  spread  through- 
out Europe. 

In  his  own  day  the  role  which  Bayle  played  was  most  impor- 
tant. His  activity  is  astonishing.  He  conducted  courses  at 
Rotterdam,  produced  his  big  folios,  and  at  the  same  time  kept 
up  an  enormous  correspondence  with  learned  scholars.  His 
books  were  published  at  London,  Geneva,  The  Hague  and  Rot- 
terdam ;  friends  and  enemies  in  England,  Germany,  France, 
Switzerland  and  Holland  were  interested  in  his  work.  Boileau 
took  pleasure  in  reading  the  Dictionary,^  Saint-Evremond  held  its 
author  in  high  esteem.-  La  Fontaine  admired  him.^  \\^illiam  III 
considered  him  enough  of  a  power  to  be  dangerous.  Christina 
of  Sweden  deigned  to  quarrel  with  him  over  certain  of  his  re- 
marks. Eflforts  were  made  to  reconvert  him  to  the  Roman  faith, 
for  his  value  as  an  ally  was  recognized.  Three  English  Lords, 
the  Earls  of  Shaftsbury,  of  Albemarle  and  of  Huntington  offered 
Bayle  patronage,  but  he  was  unwilling  to  relinquish  the  freedom 
of  his  life  at  Rotterdam  and  preferred  to  keep  busily  at  work  in 
his  own  study. 

The  products  of  this  assiduous  labor  were  received  by  the 
public  with  unusual  enthusiasm.    The  NouvcUcs  were  in  demand 

'O.  D.  IV.  772. 

*  Cf .  Cazes,  73.  Cf.  also  CEuvres  Melees  de  Saint-Evrcmond,  Paris, 
Techcner  fils,  1865,  Vol.  II,  p.  513,  note  i.  Saint-Evremond's  sympathy 
for  Bayle  is  evident  from  the  sarcastic  response  which  he  imagines 
Bayle  writing  to  the  criticism  of  Renaudot.     (^ihid.  pp.  513-16.) 

'Cf.  Cazes.  71.  Cf.  La  Fontaine,  CEuzres,  Paris,  Hachette,  1892. 
Vol.  IX,  p.  369.     (Lettre  a  M.  Simon  de  Troyes.) 


Influence  of  Bayle  127 

all  over  Europe.  The  Dictionary  was  so  immediately  popular 
that  soon  after  it  began  to  appear  the  printer  had  to  change  his 
plans  and  print  many  extra  copies.  The  first  edition  was 
promptly  followed  by  a  second.  In  1720,  after  the  author's 
death,  came  a  third.  From  1697  to  1741,  in  a  period  of  forty- 
four  years,  nine  editions  of  the  Dictionary  appeared — surely 
an  imposing  list.  During  the  Regency  the  Dictionary  was  so 
greatly  sought  after  that,  in  their  anxiety  to  peruse  the  volumes, 
zealous  students  used  to  form  in  line  at  the  doors  of  the  Biblio- 
theque  Mazarine.  The  Pensces  were  hardly  less  popular.  From 
1682  to  1704,  four  editions  were  published,  and  that  in  the  1737 
edition  of  the  (Euzres  Diverses  is  the  seventh. 

\'arious  attacks  on  Bayle's  writings  undoubtedly  helped  to  call 
attention  to  them.  The  Critique  Gcncrale  was  burned  at  the 
Place  de  Grdve  by  the  Paris  executioner.  The  proclamation 
against  the  book  was  written  by  Maimbourg  himself  and  was 
couched  in  the  most  violent  terms ;  the  three  thousand  copies  of 
this  diatribe  spread  broadcast  through  Paris  were  calculated  to 
impel  all  men  to  inspect  for  themselves  the  pernicious  work.* 
Public  interest  was  whetted  by  further  persecutions.  The  state's 
authority  was  brought  to  bear  against  the  Pensces,  and  the  pub- 
lication of  the  Dictionary  in  France  was  strictly  forbidden.  As 
late  as  1750.  certain  zealots  at  Colmar.  Germany,  inspired  by  a 
Jesuit  father,  indulged  in  an  auto  da  fe  during  which  a  number 
of  copies  of  the  Dictionary  were  consigned  to  the  flames." 

If  other  evidence  were  lacking,  the  remarks  of  certain  eight- 
eenth century  writers  alone  would  indicate  the  influence  of 
Bayle  and  show  that  his  ideas  had  taken  firm  hold.  To  Voltaire 
he  is  I'cternel  honncur  de  la  race  humainc.'^  Voltaire  testifies 
frequently  to  his  admiration.  He  regrets,  indeed,  that  the  Dic- 
tionary should  not  be  reduced  to  a  single  volume  from  which 
innumerable  articles  of  little  use  might  be  omitted  and  wherein 
the  style  might  be  chastened  and  polished.''  He  grants  also  that 
his  hero  knew  nothing  of  physics  and  that  his  understanding  of 
philosophy  was  deficient.    But  after  all  the  Dictionar}'  is  inimita- 


*  Ci.  Disraeli,  Curiosities  of  Literature,  III,  142-3. 
'  Cf .  Betz,   128,  and  the  reference  in  Betz  to  Voltaire. 
'Voltaire,   CEuvres  Completes,  Paris,   Garnier   Freres,   1877,  Vol.   VII, 
P-  477- 
'Id.  Vol.  XXXV,  288. 


128  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

ble.**  Furthermore,  the  periodical  genre  was  perfected  when 
the  Nouvellcs  were  pubhshed."  As  a  man  of  learning,  as  a  keen 
and  profound  reasoner,  Bayle  is  deserving  of  the  highest  com- 
mendation. He  has  a  mighty  power  of  exact  and  careful  analysis 
and,  even  in  the  case  of  the  most  ordinary  intelligence,  he  is 
able  to  stimulate  thought." 

The  comments  of  others,  although  not  always  friendly,  testify 
to  Bayle's  force.  Diderot  does  not  by  any  means  agree  with  all 
his  doctrines,  but  there  is  no  doubt  of  the  respect  he  feels  for 
Bayle's  contribution  to  the  development  of  the  world's  ideas.  He 
is  an  astonishing  man,  declares  Diderot,  in  paying  him  the  fol- 
lowing tribute : 

Bayle  eut  peu  d'egaux  dans  I'art  de  raisonner,  peut-etre  point  de 
superieur.  Personne  ne  sut  saisir  plus  subtilement  le  f aible  d'un  systeme ; 
personne  n'en  sut  faire  valoir  plus  fortement  les  avantages ;  redoucablc 
quand  il  prouve;  plus  redoutable  encore  quand  il  objecte:  doue  d'une 
imagination  gaie  et  feconde  en  meme  temps  qu'il  prouve,  il  amuse,  il 
peint,  il  seduit." 

The  encyclopedist  speaks  of  the  remarkable  popularity  of  the 
Critique  Generale,  and  says  the  comet  of  1680  was  made  famous 
by  the  Pensccs.  Louis  Racine's  attack  on  Bayle  in  the  Epitrc  a 
M.  Rousseau  shows  that  even  where  his  influence  was  detested 
it  was  still  potent.^-  Frederick  the  Great  was  familiar  with  our 
author's  works  and  absorbed  his  ideas  on  tolerance  and  on  the 
separation  of  morals  from  religious  dogma. ^'^  He  himself  pre- 
pared an  Extrait  du  Dictionnaire  dc  Bayle,  in  which  he  placed 
those  philosophic  articles  that  he  considered  especially  good,  and 
for  which  he  wrote  a  commendatory  preface.^* 

Viewed  then  merely  from  the  material  standpoint,  from  the 
number  of  editions  of  Bayle's  works,  from  the  facts  of  his 
activity  and  his  relations  with  the  great  Europeans  of  his  day, 


"  Id.  Vol.  XIV,  37-9- 

'Id.  Vol.  XIV,  132. 

•"Id.  Vol.  XXXIII,  568;  Vol.  XXIV,  274- 

"  Diderot,  CEnvres  Completes,  Paris,  Gamier  Freres,  1876.  Vol.  XVI, 
p.  490   {Encyclopedic,  Article  Pyrrlwnicne). 

"L.  Racine,  CEuvres,  Paris,  Le  Normant,  1808.  Vol.  II,  p.  95-  Vol- 
taire speaks  with  particular  acerbity  of  the  partiality  of  Racine  in  his 
attack  on  Bayle;  XVII,  553-5,  Dictionnaire  Philosophiquc,  Article:  Bayle. 

'°Cf.  Betz,   127-8. 

"Voltaire,  CEnvres,  XLIV,  202,  note  I. 


Influence  of  Bayle  i  29 

from  the  definitely  expressed  opinions  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
it  is  sure  that  he  was  long  a  power.  The  way  this  power  was 
exerted,  the  connection  of  liayle's  ideas  with  those  of  the  fol- 
lowing age,  may  be  seen  in  a  variety  of  cases.  There  are  a 
number  of  tendencies  for  which  he  may  to  some  extent  be  con- 
sidered responsible. 

After  the  seventeenth  century,  with  its  devotion  to  art,  there 
came  a  reaction.  The  following  century  was  not  artistic,  was 
not  distinguished  for  its  taste,  placed  emphasis  on  the  power  of 
the  intelligence  and  not  on  aesthetic  dibcermnent,  produced  com- 
paratively little  that  ranks  high  in  la  iitlerature  ioute  pure.  The 
interest  of  the  age  was  in  philosophy,  in  the  sciences,  in  sociolog- 
ical problems,  and  not  at  all  in  art  and  beauty. 

Bayle's  literary  criticism  oti'ers  the  clearest  evidence  of  the 
early  leanings  in  this  direction.  It  has  been  seen  that  his  chief 
characteristic  here  was  his  positive,  matter-of-fact  attitude,  his 
failure  to  appreciate  the  aesthetic  value  of  a  book,  and  his  in- 
clination to  judge  it  merely  as  an  intellectual  ettort.  Xo  point 
of  view  could  be  more  distinctly  of  the  eighteenth  century.  In 
judging  those  features  that  make  an  appeal  to  the  intelligence, 
Bayle  is  keen  enough.  So  the  eighteenth  century :  intellectually 
powerful  as  well  as  artistically  weak.  It  seems  undoubted  that 
Bayle's  tendencies  were  a  factor  in  the  development  of  the  fol- 
lowing century. 

Another  essential  difference  between  the  seventeenth  and  the 
eighteenth  centuries  lies  in  their  attitude  towards  authority — and 
here  again  our  author's  influence  is  evident.  The  seventeenth 
century  stood  especially  for  tradition  and  precedent.  In  religion, 
divine  and  ecclesiastic  authority  held  sway.  Whatever  the 
wrangling  among  Jesuits,  Jansenists,  Quietists,  Catholics  and 
Protestants,  their  differences  were  differences  of  sect ;  the  basic 
idea  of  faith  was  left  undisturbed.  In  politics  it  was  the  epoch 
of  the  roi  soldi,  the  voice  of  the  people  was  not  raised,  the  noble's 
power  was  practically  nil,  the  monarchical  spirit  permeated  every- 
thing. Society  was  an  institution  already  fully  fashioned  and 
permanent ;  individuals  indeed  might  change,  but  authority  had 
set  its  mark  upon  the  various  groups  as  such,  and  there  were  no 
shifts.  Literature  had  its  dictator  in  Boileau.  Here  again,  only 
within  limits  might  individuality  assert  itself;  there  were  just 
so  many  literary  kinds,  and  such  and  such  precepts  for  composing 


130  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

in  each  genre.  x'Xuthority  demanded  that  one  should  be  a  devout 
and  submissive  Christian,  a  loyal  subject  to  absolute  monarchy, 
a  faithful  adherent  to  the  established  principles  of  literary 
expression. 

The  eighteenth  century,  and  Bayle  as  its  first  representative, 
cared  nothing  for  established  principles.  The  spirit  of  tradition 
and  precedent  was  given  many  a  rude  jolt,  and  at  length  was 
completely  overturned.  The  French  Revolution  was  the  final 
expression  of  the  overthrow  of  the  idea  of  authority.  Bayle  was 
not  only  one  of  the  earliest  but  one  of  the  most  important  con- 
tributors to  this  movement.  The  general  esprit  critique  which 
characterized  his  writings,  the  universal  scepticism,  has  been 
noted.  The  freedom  which  he  allows  himself  in  the  particular 
field  of  literary  criticism  has  been  pointed  out  at  some  length. 
Bayle  not  only  examined,  he  attacked.  The  turn  of  mind,  natur- 
ally contradictory,  of  this  indefatigable  investigator  made  him 
take  great  pleasure  in  denying  fixed  precepts,  and  his  extraor- 
dinary keenness  gave  him  a  sure  sense  of  their  vulnerable  points. 
Joined  to  all  this  was  perhaps  a  certain  malignity,  a  mischievous 
delight  in  perplexing  the  poor,  unthinking,  everyday  reader. 
Moreover  Bayle  made  use  of  his  power  to  give  interest  to  these 
attacks.  The  digressions,  the  easy  manner  in  which  he  passed 
from  one  subject  to  another,  relieving  a  theological  doctrine  with 
a  bit  of  raillery,  introducing  an  amusing  story  or  a  salete — these 
attracted  readers  and  held  their  attention  to  books  which  seemed 
most  unusual  and  which  presented  strange,  compelling  arguments 
against  the  established  conceptions  they  had  been  born  to  and  had 
always  accepted. 

In  matters  of  erudition,  too,  the  freedom  of  thought  so  char- 
acteristic of  Bayle  exerted  its  influence  on  the  following  century. 
It  has  been  seen  that  in  the  field  of  scholarship  and  history  he 
was  far  from  being  awe-struck  by  great  names,  that  he  was 
always  inclined  to  doubt,  to  demand  substantial  documentary  evi- 
dence. Such  independence  of  judgment  was  as  foreign  to  the 
seventeenth  century  as  it  was  distinctly-  characteristic  of  the  fol- 
lowing period.  Bayle  is  the  connecting  link.  The  Dictionary 
spread  this  conception  among  the  writers  of  the  next  age.  l-lven 
in  the  attention  paid  to  minute  details  of  erudition  its  author 
foreshadows  the  eighteenth  century,  lie  heli)s  develoj)  the  tend- 
ency to  consider  the  little   facts,  which  are  petty  in  tiiemselves, 


Influence  of  Bayle  1 3 1 

but  which  soinctinies  lead  to  ciionnous  consequences.  A  his- 
torian hkc  \oltairc,  wlio  looks  on  such  tiny  sparks  as  capable 
of  kiiuilin}^  tremendous  conllaprations.  has  evidently  felt  the 
innuenco  of  i'aylc. 

Even  in  the  method^  pursued  by  I'.ayle  in  presenting  his  revo- 
lutionary princii)lcs.  hi^  inlluence  is  noteworthy.  It  was  danger- 
ous in  his  time  and  indeed  later  to  speak  with  such  extraordinary 
freedom  on  matters  of  religion,  morals  and  learning.  It  was 
long  necessary  to  conciliate  the  ruling  powers,  or  at  least  to  avoid 
olTending  them.  Our  author  had  his  own  scheme  for  doing  this: 
he  scatteied  his  revolutionary  reiuarks  in  such  a  way  that  on  no 
single  page  could  there  be  found  enough  evidence  to  damn  him 
as  a  seditious  writer.  Potent  doctrines  are  discovered  tucked 
awav  in  the  most  unexpected  places,  in  notes  where  no  censor 
would  look  for  them.  It  is  precisely  this  method  which  is  em- 
ployed by  the  eighteenth  century  and  advocated  by  Diderot  in 
his  article  on  encyclopedia  writing.^'' 

The  direct  influence  of  Bayle  as  a  journalist  is  considerable. 
We  have  noted  the  distinctive  marks  of  the  N onvcUcs,  and  espe- 
cially Rayle's  attitude  as  editor.  Tlie  universal  character  of  the 
periodical,  the  enormous  range  of  subjects,  the  interest  in  all 
fields  of  intellectual  activity  and  the  desire  to  bring  all  these 
things  to  the  attention  of  the  reading  public,  and  to  stimulate,  in 
this  public,  a  liking  for  information  and  for  thinking — such  are 
the  traits  that  lead  Betz  to  style  the  Nouvcllcs  the  crstc  popidar- 
7visscnschaftliche  Zcitschrift.  It  is  certain  that  later  journalists 
understood  the  value  of  the  XoiivcUcs  as  a  model.  It  is  also 
certain  that  the  impartiality  displayed  in  conducting  this  work, 
the  absolute  freedom  from  bias  and  the  refusal  to  seek  patronage, 
oflFered  to  editors  a  noble  example. 

Needless  to  say,  while  there  are  so  many  traits  which  our 
autlior  liad  in  comn^on  with  the  eighteenth  century  and  a  num- 
ber of  lines  along  which  he  influenced  the  next  age.  in  some 
respects  he  differed  radically  from  his  successors  He  would  not 
always  have  recognized  his  descendants. 

The  eighteenth  century  men  were  distinctly  men  of  action,  and 
Bayle  was  not.  They  associated  their  thoughts  and  the  practical 
consequences,  and  he  did  not.  He  was  a  quiet,  sedentary  person 
who  delighted   to  live   in   his   study   and   took   no  hand   in   the 

"  Cf .   Brunetiere.   Etudes  Critiques,  V.    167,   ff. 


132  The  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

affairs  of  the  world.  He  was  interested  in  truth  for  truth's 
sake ;  he  did  not  study  its  bearing  on  the  details  of  everyday 
existence.  \'oltaire,  Diderot  and  their  contemporaries  were  con- 
cerned with  social  and  political  problems  and  their  compositions 
had  a  real,  practical  significance.  They  were  hot-blooded  enthusi- 
asts who  stood  stoutly  by  their  principles  and  were  not  sparing 
in  villification  of  their  adversaries.  Rayle,  calm  and  dispassion- 
ate, was  far  from  having  confidence  in  the  value  of  his  own 
ideas,  he  was  inconsistent  and  admitted  it,  he  was  gentle  in 
his  censures.  Not  practical  and  not  an  enthusiast,  his  writings, 
whatever  their  attractions,  lacked  the  interest  awakened  by  an 
author  who  espouses  his  cause  with  warmth  and  positiveness. 
The  eighteenth  century  did  not  sympathize  with  such  a  nonchalant 
attitude. 

Other  points  of  difference  are  marked.  What  few  opinions 
Bayle  had  on  politics  were  monarchical.  Doubtless  his  own 
habits  of  life  had  something  to  do  with  this ;  a  lover  of  peace  and 
quiet  and  of  opportunity  for  study,  he  would  not  relish  the  idea 
of  political  upsets,  he  would  prefer  the  feeling  of  certainty  in- 
spired by  such  an  absolute  monarch  as  Louis  XIV.  The  theories 
of  republican  government  he  was  inclined  to  look  on  as  pretexts 
for  the  bullyings  of  demagogues.  It  is  unnecessary  to  comment 
on  the  different  point  of  view  which  characterized  the  eighteenth 
century.  Furthermore  Rayle  was  not  at  all  a  man  of  science, 
and  his  knowledge  of  the  natural  sciences  was  especially 
meagre.  The  eighteenth  century  devoted  much  of  its  energy 
to  science  and  based  thereon  many  of  its  most  aggressive 
doctrines.  There  is  none  of  this  interest  in  Bayle.  And  he  is 
far  from  paying  the  cult  to  reason  so  typical  of  the  eighteenth 
century.  He  overturns  authority  on  the  basis  of  reason,  he 
appeals  to  reason  to  support  his  independence  and  freedom  of 
thought,  but.  after  all,  he  concludes  that  reason  too  is  a  poor 
thing.     To  him  reason  is  far  from  a  goddess. 

Bayle,  then,  is  like  and  unlike  the  eighteenth  century.  Living 
himself  in  the  seventeenth  centurv  and  in  the  midst  of  its  ideas, 
the  position  he  took  was  distinctly  radical ;  he  was  most  certainly 
a  forerunner  of  the  later  period,  and  his  influence  was  most 
certainly  powerful.  At  the  same  time  he  does  not  really  belong 
to  either  age;  he  is  ratlicr  a  connecting  link  between  the  two 
epochs,  and,  as  such,  his  position  is  of  great  significance. 


r.iiw.K  »(;r.\i'iiv 

I.      Works  hy   Raylc. 

Dictioiniairc  Historique  rl  Critique'  (cd.  Rcuchot).     Paris.  Desoer,  1820. 
16  vols.  8  vo. 

CRmrcs  l^ivcrscs.   coiitciiaiit   tout  cc   que  cct  autcur  a   public 
execute  sou  Dictioiiuairc    ..."     La  Hayc,  1737.     4  vols.,  fol. 

De  Bude.  E.   (ed  )  :   Lcttrcs  Inedites  adrcssccs  de  1686  a   1731  a  J.-A. 
Turrettini,  thcologicu  gciicvois.     Paris  ct   Geneve.    1887.     3  vols.,   12  mo. 

Cliaravay.   E.   (ed.):   Vne  I.cttrc  incditc  de  Pierre  Bayle. 
In:    L' Amateur  d'Autotjraphes,  15  Septembrc,   1898. 

d'Eichtal,   E.    (ed.)  :    Uue  Lettre  iucdite  de   Bayle. 

In :   Revue  d'llistoire  Littcraire  de  la  France,   1909,  pp.   352-3. 

Gigas,    Emile    (ed.)  :    Choix   de   la   Corrcspoiidance   Incditc   de   Pierre 
Bayle.     Copenhague.  J.  E.  C.  Gad,   1890. 

Ph.  Tamizey  de  Larroque   (ed.)  :   Une  Lettre  incditc  de  Bayle. 
In:  Rez'uc  d'llistoire  Littcraire  de  la  France,  1894,  pp.  430-32. 

Pelissier,  L.   G.    (ed.)  :    Quelqucs  Lcttrcs  de  Bayle   ct  de  Balucc. 
In:  Annates  du  Midi,  1891,  pp.  21-59. 

Pelissier.  L.  G.   (ed.)  :  Lett  res  de  Divers  Ecrivains  Frangais. 
In :    Bulletin   du    Bibliophile,    15    Mars.    IQ06. 

Volney.  H.   (ed.)  :   Une  Lettre  incditc  de  Bayle.     Uu  Pnhne  franqais  a 
la   ntcinoire  de  Bayle. 

In;   Revue  d'Ardcnne  ct  d'Argonne,  Juin,   1900. 

Waddington.    Francis    (ed.)  :    Memoires   Incdits  de   Jean   Rou.      Paris, 
Societe  de   I'llistoire   du   Protestantisme   Frangais.    1857. 


'  Referred  to  as  "  D "  in  the  present  study.  Besides  volume  and 
page,  article  and  note  are  given  in  order  to  facilitate  locating  the  refer- 
ences in  other  editions.  Where  several  articles  bear  the  same  name, 
the  one  referred  to  is  identified  by  a  following  numeral. 

"  Referred  to  as  "  O.  D."  in  the  present  study.  Where  on  a  single 
page  in  the  O.  D.  there  is  more  than  one  chapter,  section  or  letter,  the 
reference  is  made  more  definite  by  adding  the  Roman  numeral  which 
indicates  the  particular  division.  The  collection  of  letters  in  the  first 
volume,  which  has  a  separate  pagination,  is  referred  to  as  "  O.  D 
I.  L." 


134  Tlie  Literary  Criticism  of  Pierre  Bayle 

II.  Works  on  Bayle. 

Arabet,   Rene:   Discoitrs  a    riitaugnration    dn    mo)iHmcnt   Pierre   Bayle. 
Toulouse,    1005. 

Bastide,  Ch. :  Bayle  est-il  I'auteur  de  I  "Avis  atix  Refugies"? 
In:    Bulletin   de   la  Socicte  de   I'Histoire   dn   Protestantisme   Fraii(ais, 
1907,  PP-  544-558. 

Betz,  Louis  P. :  Pierre  Bayle  uiid  die  "  Nouvelles  de  la  Republique 
des  Lettres"     Zurich,   Albert   Miiller,    1896. 

Brunetiere,  F. :  Etudes  Critiques  sur  I'Histoire  dc  la  Litterature  Fran- 
gaise.      Cinquieme   Serie,   Paris.  Hachette,   1893. 

Bruaetiere,  F. :  La  Formation  de  I'Esprit  Encyclopediste. 
In :  Revue  Hebdomadaire,  9  et  16  Nov.  1907. 

Cazes,  Albert :  Pierre  Bayle,  sa  vie,  ses  id'ees,  son  influence,  son  (ruvre, 
Paris,   Dujarric  et   C'^,    1905. 

Disraeli,  Isaac :  Curiosities  of  Literature.  Boston,  William  Veazie, 
1858. 

Douen,  O. :   Un  Opusclc  dc  Bayle. 

In:  Bulletin  de  la  Societc  de  I'Histoire  du  Protestantisme  Frangais. 
1877,  pp.  94-95- 

Faguet,  Emile :  Di.v-huiticme  Siccle.  Paris,  Societe  Fran^aise  d'lm- 
primerie   et   de  Librairie,   1898. 

Haag,  Eugene  et  Emile:  La  France  Protestante.  Paris,  Librarie  San- 
doz  et  Fischbacher,  1877.  Article  on  Bayle  (by  H.  Bordier),  Vol.  I.  col. 
1055  ff- 

Janet,  Paul :  Notice  sur  des  Lettres  inedites  de  Bayle. 
In:   Seances  et   Travaux  de  I' Academic  des  Sciences  Morales  et  Poli- 
tiques,  Compte-Rendu,  Juin,    1875. 

Kent,  Henry  W. :  Pierre  Bayle's  Dictionary. 
In;   Library  .fournal.  Vol.   36,   No.   i,  Jan.    1911. 

Lanson,     Gustave :     Origines    et    premieres     manifestations    de    I'esprit 
pliilosophique  dans  la  litterature  frangaise  de   1675  a   1748. 
In  :  Revue  des  Cours  et  Conferences,  Paris,  1907-8. 

Lenient,  C. :   Etude  sur  Bayle.     Paris,  chez  Madame   V^  Joubert,   1855. 

Picavct,  F. :  Bayle.     Article  in  La  Grande  Encyclopedie. 

Rossel,  Vergile:  Histoire  de  la  Litterature  Frangaisc  hors  de  France. 
Paris,  Alfred   Schlachter. 


Bibliography  1 3  5 

Rougerie :    Bayle   le   Sceftique   et   la    tolerance    a    Famiers     en     i8y8. 
Pamiers,   1898. 

Sainte-Beuve.   C.   A.:    Portraits  Litteraires,  I.     Paris,   Gamier    Freres, 
1862. 

Sainte-Beuve,    C.    A.:    Nouveaux    Lundis,    IX.      Paris,    Michel    Levy 
Freres.  1867. 

Sayous,  A. :   Histoire  de  la  Litterature  Franqaisc  d  I'Etranger.     Paris. 
Cherbuliez,   1853'' 

Schoell,   Th.  :    Pierre   Bayle.  a  f>ro[^os  de   deux  litres   recents. 
In :    Bulletin    de   la    Societe   de    I'Uistoire    du    Protestantisme   Franqais, 
1908.   pp.  359-375 

Sheldon.    F. :    Pierre  Bayle. 

In:  North  American  Review,  Vol.  CXI,  1870,  p.  377  ff. 

Souquet,   Paul :  Pierre  Bayle,  Libre  Penseur  et  folitique. 
In:   La   Revolution   Franqaise,   Revue   d'Histoire  Moderne  et   Contem- 
toraine.  \'o].   XVI II.   1890,  pp.  97-124:   210-231. 

Vinet,  Alexandre:  Moralistes  des  Xl'I^  et  XVII'  Siecles.     Paris,  1859. 


Vol.   I.  p.  238.  contains  a  quotation   from  an  inedited   letter  of   Bayle. 


MTA 

I,  Horatio  Elwin  Smith,  was  born  May  8,  1886,  at  Cam- 
bridge, ^Massachusetts.  I  attended  public  schools  in  Cambridge 
and  Soiiierville,  Massachusetts,  and  in  Brattleboro,  \'erniont,  and 
graduated  from  Amherst  College  in  1908  with  the  degree  of 
A.  B.  The  three  years  from  February,  1908  to  February,  1911, 
were  spent  as  a  student  of  Romance  Languages  at  the  Johns 
Hopkins  University.  Since  the  last-named  date  I  have  been 
instructor  in  French  in  Yale  College.  The  summer  of  1909  was 
spent  in  study  in  Paris. 

I  desire  herein  to  express  my  appreciation  of  courses  followed 
under  Professors  ^I.  P.  Brush,  G.  C.  Keidel.  C.  C.  Marden. 
J.  E.  Shaw,  A.  Terracher  and  F.  M.  Warren,  and  to  acknowledge 
my  especial  indebtedness  to  the  late  Professor  A.  Marshall  El- 
liott, to  Professors  Edward  C.  Armstrong'and  Phillip  Ogden.  and 
to  Professor  William  A.  Nitze  of  the  University  of  Chicago. 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 


LOAN  DEPT. 


RENEWALS  ONLY — TEL.  NO.  642-3405 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recalL 

MAR    otatui^a 


raeOlD  JWISTO'SPMOS 


1 8  1973  0  J> 


rvirv-  (gf  'V^ 


hi 


■IffBLD  NOM  17  t^-^^ 


LD21A-60m-6,'69 
(J90968l0)476-A-32 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


